# Goldsmiths University Diversity officer facing sack



## Fingers (May 19, 2015)

It seems Goldsmith's Diversity Officer is back in the media again after tweeting the awful  #killallwhitemen hash tag and using terms such as 'white trash' on the Official Twitter account.

I am failing to see how her position as diversity officer is tenable.

http://metro.co.uk/2015/05/19/golds...l-all-white-men-hashtag-5205013/?ito=facebook

What does Urban think?


----------



## Blagsta (May 19, 2015)

She sounds like an idiot


----------



## Dowie (May 19, 2015)

she's white herself, I'm not sure how being (presumably of Turkish origin) lets her start talking about 'people of colour' as though she, a white person, faces the same potential for discrimination day to day as a black person may

I think she is just seeking attention


----------



## brogdale (May 19, 2015)

Killing _all_ white men?
Hmmm...ambitious, but I can't see how that would effect diversity.


----------



## Chick Webb (May 19, 2015)

When I see people acting this stupidly I can't help but speculate whether they are provocateurs sent in to discredit various movements, even when I know they're not.   I do know someone who is very politically astute who uses the term "white trash" though.  It makes me cringe, but maybe that kind of language is acceptable in some circles.


----------



## Fingers (May 19, 2015)

Here is the text for the petition with some accusations that were not mentioned in the Metro



> We call for a vote of no confidence on the current Welfare and Diversity Officer. In summary this petition states that the current Welfare and Diversity Officer has: - Made students feel intimidated, unsupported, and unrepresented - Been unprofessional in her public conduct and behaviour towards both students and staff - Encouraged or expressed hatred based on an individual’s race, gender, or social position Students have come forward who do not believe that the current Welfare and Diversity Officer can represent the student body.
> 
> believe that she has refused to represent students unless they agree with her actions and beliefs, and has frequently spread anger and hatred instead of providing unbiased welfare support. The recent media storm, that has wrongly targeted BME only events, has also resulted in students being shouted down for trying to voice any concerns about the current Welfare and Diversity Officer. As a result individual students have been too afraid to come forward with their issues to their student representatives. In addition to this, had the BME meeting been handled in a more professional way many feel that BME meetings at Goldsmiths would not now be facing a public attack.
> 
> ...


----------



## Almor (May 19, 2015)

Maybe she's a NOFX fan


----------



## J Ed (May 19, 2015)

Idiot child


----------



## Fingers (May 19, 2015)

She certainly does not do herself any favours


----------



## J Ed (May 19, 2015)

Shame that she can't trade in all that subcultural capital for a bit of common sense


----------



## Dowie (May 19, 2015)

Fingers said:


> She certainly does not do herself any favours
> 
> View attachment 71626



She's probably spend too long on tumbler... crap like this is just going to undermine the campaigns of others


----------



## trabuquera (May 19, 2015)

A Tory government's wet dream, no?


----------



## Sirena (May 19, 2015)

On the other hand....

https://www.change.org/p/goldsmiths...tafa-welfare-and-diversity-officer-goldsmiths


----------



## Fingers (May 19, 2015)

Sirena said:


> On the other hand....
> 
> https://www.change.org/p/goldsmiths...tafa-welfare-and-diversity-officer-goldsmiths



That was set up four weeks ago, well before her latest Twitter outbursts.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

Dowie said:


> she's white herself, I'm not sure how being (presumably of Turkish origin) lets her start talking about 'people of colour' as though she, a white person, faces the same potential for discrimination day to day as a black person may
> 
> I think she is just seeking attention


depends what you mean by white. does she identify as white?


----------



## gosub (May 19, 2015)

what is the role/responsibilities of a Diversity Officer?


----------



## StoneRoad (May 19, 2015)

Can't see how someone that the students appear to distrust so much, can actually hope to become the advocate for them.


----------



## joustmaster (May 19, 2015)

gosub said:


> what is the role/responsibilities of a Diversity Officer?


to kill all white men.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 19, 2015)

Dowie said:


> she's white herself, I'm not sure how being (presumably of Turkish origin) lets her start talking about 'people of colour' as though she, a white person, faces the same potential for discrimination day to day as a black person may



I've seen this sort of thing before, young middle class white kids who so desperately want to be something other than white and middle class. If you're aware of the struggles facing migrants, ethnic minorities, lgbt people or (insert oppressed people here) and you find yourself wanting to be in the same boat they're in so that you too can feel hard done by then there's a good chance you've missed the point.

Victims of real oppression generally realise that, while they may have many entirely valid reasons to hate the rich white men who run the world, being a petulant dick about it just plays into the hands of their enemies.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 19, 2015)

I would read up all the storifies and pastebins and one-post blogspots and tweets of screencaps of Facebook posts with screencaps of tweets in them, but I'm not going to.

The general point of the Metro trying to imply that the use of "misandry" and #killallwhitemen is outrageously racist and sexist is a bit more interesting but really not that interesting—of course it's doing that.

"White trash" is a really bad term to try to repurpose, given its origin as a classist term, but I'm having trouble giving much of a toss about it in this instance; it isn't widespread.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 19, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I would read up all the storifies and pastebins and one-post blogspots and tweets of screencaps of Facebook posts with screencaps of tweets in them, but I'm not going to.



I literally have no idea what you just said.


----------



## killer b (May 19, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I've seen this sort of thing before, young middle class white kids who so desperately want to be something other than white and middle class. If you're aware of the struggles facing migrants, ethnic minorities, lgbt people or (insert oppressed people here) and you find yourself wanting to be in the same boat they're in so that you too can feel hard done by then there's a good chance you've missed the point.
> 
> Victims of real oppression generally realise that, while they may have many entirely valid reasons to hate the rich white men who run the world, being a petulant dick about it just plays into the hands of their enemies.


Do you think that's what's happened here?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I would read up all the storifies and pastebins and one-post blogspots and tweets of screencaps of Facebook posts with screencaps of tweets in them, but I'm not going to.
> 
> The general point of the Metro trying to imply that the use of "misandry" and #killallwhitemen is outrageously racist and sexist is a bit more interesting but really not that interesting—of course it's doing that.
> 
> "White trash" is a really bad term to try to repurpose, given its origin as a classist term, but I'm having trouble giving much of a toss about it in this instance; it isn't widespread.


try harder  you're a mod. you're supposed to set an example


----------



## rekil (May 19, 2015)

why only #killallwhitemen instead of #KillAllMen


----------



## gosub (May 19, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> to kill all white men.


i know its Goldsmith's, but I presume if that generations Stephen Hawking is studying there, having her in in that job is bad news


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> I literally have no idea what you just said.


he said he might have researched the story on the internet but found more pressing things to do.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 19, 2015)

killer b said:


> Do you think that's what's happened here?



This woman just reminds me of people I've encountered before. If there was an olympic medal for hating white people, I guarantee a white person would win it.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I've seen this sort of thing before, young middle class white kids who so desperately want to be something other than white and middle class. If you're aware of the struggles facing migrants, ethnic minorities, lgbt people or (insert oppressed people here) and you find yourself wanting to be in the same boat they're in so that you too can feel hard done by then there's a good chance you've missed the point.
> 
> Victims of real oppression generally realise that, while they may have many entirely valid reasons to hate the rich white men who run the world, being a petulant dick about it just plays into the hands of their enemies.


i don't doubt she's said some unwise things and perhaps should not be working as a diversity officer, but why are people saying she is white herself? it's not up to you


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 19, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> he said he might have researched the story on the internet but found more pressing things to do.



Ahh. Thank you.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

copliker said:


> why only #killallwhitemen instead of #KillAllMen


let's promote equality and just #kill


----------



## Belushi (May 19, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> i don't doubt she's said some unwise things and perhaps should not be working as a diversity officer, but why are people saying she is white herself? it's not up to you



I couldn't suddenly decide I'm black, that would be ludicrous.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> i don't doubt she's said some unwise things and perhaps should not be working as a diversity officer, but why are people saying she is white herself? it's not up to you


what hue do you think she is?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 19, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> try harder  you're a mod. you're supposed to set an example




I shall be banned from Twitter now for not putting enough effort in.


----------



## Belushi (May 19, 2015)

who is that commenteritwat who insists she is a PoC because she has *really *curly hair?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

Belushi said:


> I couldn't suddenly decide I'm black, that would be ludicrous.


of course not, but a person of turkish heritage might not identify as white.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

Belushi said:


> who is that commenteritwat who insists she is a PoC because she has *really *curly hair?


you're not narrowing it down


----------



## seventh bullet (May 19, 2015)

It's mostly a middle class thing, isn't it? Well, even more so at a university.  If they're thirsty I could send them some white trash tears.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> of course not, but a person of turkish heritage might not identify as white.


yeh but you'd hope if they found themselves in this sort of position they'd try to demonstrate some wit or nous.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> what hue do you think she is?


i don't know. perhaps you should ask her.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

seventh bullet said:


> It's mostly a middle class thing, isn't it? Well, even more so at a university.  If they're thirsty I could send them some white trash tears.


but could you cry them a river?


----------



## seventh bullet (May 19, 2015)

Belushi said:


> who is that commenteritwat who insists she is a PoC because she has *really *curly hair?



Flavia Dzodan.


----------



## treelover (May 19, 2015)

Maybe someone can refer her to our remembrance thread for those who are no longer here as a consequence of the benefit reforms, might give her some perspective.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> i don't know. perhaps you should ask her.


so you'd have me ask her "what hue does orang utan - yes, i know, but he's a man not an ape, it's just a nickname - yes, anyway, what colour does he think you are?"


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> so you'd have me ask her "what hue does orang utan - yes, i know, but he's a man not an ape, it's just a nickname - yes, anyway, what colour does he think you are?"


huh?


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 19, 2015)

And as a matter of general principle if you want someone killed you should do it yourself and not just encourage others to do it for you. In the case of genocide it may not be practical to kill _everyone_ yourself, but you should at least have the decency to join in.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 19, 2015)

Pulls up deckchair. Cracks open a beer.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 19, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> so you'd have me ask her "what hue does orang utan - yes, i know, but he's a man not an ape, it's just a nickname - yes, anyway, what colour does he think you are?"



Obviously that's not what he meant you daft sod.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> huh?


i asked you what colour you thought her. you said i should ask her. i was pointing out what an unbelievably stupid thing that was for you to say.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Obviously that's not what he meant you daft sod.


it's what he said. i'm sorry, i must have missed the telepathy training.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i asked you what colour you thought her. you said i should ask her. i was pointing out what an unbelievably stupid thing that was for you to say.


why? i'm not sure what the answer is. if there is an answer. what is a white person? what is a brown person? what is a black person? are you brave enough to state clearly which is which?


----------



## Dowie (May 19, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> depends what you mean by white. does she identify as white?



I'm not sure race is a mental state or something you can chose to self identify as, granted it is rather arbitrary. I mean there are some white people on the internet who are seemingly obsessed with Japanese culture, I'm sure some of them would love to self identify as Asian... but it doesn't really work like that.

She's from an ethnic minority and has a name that alludes to that, but she is still a white person... walking down the street she isn't necessarily going to be treated any differently to any other white person.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> why? i'm not sure what the answer is. if there is an answer. what is a white person? what is a brown person? what is a black person? are you brave enough to state clearly which is which?


yes. i am that brave. but i am not foolhardy.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yes


go on then.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> go on then.


eh? i said i'm brave, not foolhardy.


----------



## cantsin (May 19, 2015)

Fingers said:


> Here is the text for the petition with some accusations that were not mentioned in the Metro



the parts re:  the Occupation seem to suggest that she took leave to participate, therefore wasn't available to studes in the usual place / times, so suggested people attended the Occupation - the tone of the petition doesn't sound like they were supporters


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> eh? i said i'm brave, not foolhardy.


i replied before your edit


----------



## killer b (May 19, 2015)

I cant see where she's claimed to be black, tbf.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

Dowie said:


> I'm not sure race is a mental state or something you can chose to self identify as, granted it is rather arbitrary. I mean there are some white people on the internet who are seemingly obsessed with Japanese culture, I'm sure some of them would love to self identify as Asian... but it doesn't really work like that.
> 
> She's from an ethnic minority and has a name that alludes to that, but she is still a white person... walking down the street she isn't necessarily going to be treated any differently to any other white person.


paging dialectician


----------



## gosub (May 19, 2015)

cantsin said:


> the parts re:  the Occupation seem to suggest that she took leave to participate, therefore wasn't available to studes in the usual place / times, so suggested people attended the Occupation - the tone of the petition doesn't sound like they were supporters



"
An email from the uni’s spokesperson Liz Hutchinson said: “Students occupied a small section of a corridor in Richard Hoggart Building this afternoon, using padlocks to prevent access to the area.

“Services based in that corridor are frontline student services, including access to hardship funds, disability support and immigration advice."

http://goldsmiths.tab.co.uk/2015/04...r-they-shut-down-disability-support-building/ 

Funny that. Given that the "non supporters" were disabled


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> i replied before your edit


nonetheless possessing bravery does not mean lacking intelligence, no matter how much you might wish it so.


----------



## The39thStep (May 19, 2015)

Next stop Clapton Ultras


----------



## andysays (May 19, 2015)

killer b said:


> I cant see where she's claimed to be black, tbf.



Here (at least, this is what she's reported as saying)


----------



## likesfish (May 19, 2015)

Well if she was being paid to do stuff then she shouldnt be doing occupations although what exactly a diversity officer does day to day is anyones guess


----------



## killer b (May 19, 2015)

andysays said:


> Here (at least, this is what she's reported as saying)


Am I missing something? She doesn't claim to be black there?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 19, 2015)

andysays said:


> Here (at least, this is what she's reported as saying)


She doesn't claim to be black there, but I think that article gives you an idea of the Metro's attitude in general.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> nonetheless possessing bravery does not mean lacking intelligence, no matter how much you might wish it so.


i did not suggest that brave = stupid


----------



## treelover (May 19, 2015)

> An email from the uni’s spokesperson Liz Hutchinson



I wonder if that is 'Liz Hutchinson', former Sheffield Uni Womens Officer.


----------



## gosub (May 19, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Well if she was being paid to do stuff then she shouldnt be doing occupations although what exactly a diversity officer does day to day is anyones guess


From this thread I'd guess her job is all about race.  Odd, if I was disabled and a Goldsmiths student, and had a load students stopping me disability support, i did would of thought her office would have been my next port of call.  To find that she wasn't there and was in fact trying to arrange my grievance was shouted down, would have pissed me right off, more so than her wanting me killed. (being white and male)


----------



## andysays (May 19, 2015)

killer b said:


> Am I missing something? She doesn't claim to be black there?



Very first line of story


> A university diversity officer who banned men and white people from an event about equality has said she cannot be racist because she’s an ethnic minority woman.



Direct quote from Mustafa herself


> I, an ethnic minority woman, cannot be racist or sexist towards white men...
> 
> ...women of colour and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist, since *we* do not stand to benefit from such a system



Black, ethnic minority, and person/woman of colour are being used as effective synonyms here.


----------



## killer b (May 19, 2015)

She is an ethnic minority woman though.


----------



## killer b (May 19, 2015)

And they certainly aren't being used as synonyms.


----------



## editor (May 19, 2015)

If anyone has the time or energy:


----------



## Dowie (May 19, 2015)

killer b said:


> Am I missing something? She doesn't claim to be black there?



She banned 'men' and 'white people' from an event she was organising and then made references to people of colour - so she doesn't seem to consider herself white

no she doesn't claim to be black either


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 19, 2015)

> I, an ethnic minority woman, cannot be racist or sexist towards white men...



I don't know why she's put herself in the sentence though. Women in general cannot be sexist towards men, and people from ethnic minorities cannot be racist towards the predominant ethnic group. But, like probably a great many other things, she only seems to be interested in this stuff as it pertains to her personally.

Also, 'not racist' does not necessarily mean 'not an idiot'.


----------



## andysays (May 19, 2015)

killer b said:


> And they certainly aren't being used as synonyms.



Sorry, I should have been clearer about the synonym bit.

What I meant was that the terms are widely used as such within student identity politics circles, not that they're being used as such on this thread.

It is strictly true that whoever said on this thread she was saying she herself was black is incorrect, but IMO that's not especially important in the overall context.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 19, 2015)

editor said:


> If anyone has the time or energy:




I'm not gonna watch that but I would just like to award this woman an extra 40,000 irony points for having a black woman stand there and hold her microphone for her.


----------



## killer b (May 19, 2015)

andysays said:


> Sorry, I should have been clearer about the synonym bit.
> 
> What I meant was that the terms are widely used as such within student identity politics circles, not that they're being used as such on this thread.
> 
> It is strictly true that whoever said on this thread she was saying she herself was black is incorrect, but IMO that's not especially  in the overall context.


Posters in thread were complaining that she isn't black enough or something. I was just wondering where that came from, as it seems to have formed the bulk of the discussion so far.


----------



## BigTom (May 19, 2015)

gosub said:


> From this thread I'd guess her job is all about race.  Odd, if I was disabled and a Goldsmiths student, and had a load students stopping me disability support, i did would of thought her office would have been my next port of call.  To find that she wasn't there and was in fact trying to arrange my grievance was shouted down, would have pissed me right off, more so than her wanting me killed. (being white and male)


I wouldn't believe the uni on that one, knowing how much uni of Birmingham have lied about occupations here, I'd be very surprised if any student was blocked from accessing support services, unless it was by university security staff.


----------



## gosub (May 19, 2015)

BigTom said:


> I wouldn't believe the uni on that one, knowing how much uni of Birmingham have lied about occupations here, I'd be very surprised if any student was blocked from accessing support services, unless it was by university security staff.



so the uni has resorted to lying in a petition, to get a referendum that mght see her sacked.


----------



## Fingers (May 19, 2015)

gosub said:


> so the uni has resorted to lying in a petition, to get a referendum that mght see her sacked.



That was not in the petition, it was in the Goldsmith's TAB

http://goldsmiths.tab.co.uk/2015/04...r-they-shut-down-disability-support-building/


----------



## andysays (May 19, 2015)

killer b said:


> Posters in thread were complaining that she isn't black enough or something. I was just wondering where that came from, as it seems to have formed the bulk of the discussion so far.



IMO the issue is not whether she is "black enough", whatever exactly people think that means, but that she has apparently countered various claims of wrong-doing on her part by saying


> ‘There have been charges laid against me that I am racist and sexist towards white men.
> 
> ‘I, an ethnic minority woman, cannot be racist or sexist towards white men, because racism and sexism describe structures of privilege based on race and gender.
> 
> ‘Therefore, women of colour and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist, since we do not stand to benefit from such a system.’



She's using her BME position to attempt to deflect any criticism in an utterly dishonest and disengenuous way


----------



## BigTom (May 19, 2015)

gosub said:


> so the uni has resorted to lying in a petition, to get a referendum that mght see her sacked.


Not necessarily, but plausible, uni of bham has lied like that on two separate occasions to (try to) do exactly that to union officers here, more likely just general lying to seek to discredit the occupation/occupiers, as that will have been an agreed line to take when talking about the occupation.


----------



## rekil (May 19, 2015)

I'm not watching that video until the white man with the check shirt and big Irish hair is edited out.


----------



## J Ed (May 19, 2015)

andysays said:


> She's using her BME position to attempt to deflect any criticism in an utterly dishonest and disengenuous way



Within the subculture of the subculture (left-wing student politics) this is a totally valid, and indeed basically the only, response. Look at social media around the NUS elections and it's basically just student politics grouplets using this language against each other over and over. No actual politics or logical argumentation, just this stuff.


----------



## gosub (May 19, 2015)

Fingers said:


> That was not in the petition, it was in the Goldsmith's TAB
> 
> http://goldsmiths.tab.co.uk/2015/04...r-they-shut-down-disability-support-building/


From the petition: "This is especially relevant to the repercussions of the recent occupation she was involved in leading. During the occupation she booked a short amount of leave and then declared she was ‘on leave until further notice’, leaving students without an official Welfare and Diversity Officer. When asked to attend a meeting intended to allow disabled students to voice their concerns in a safe space where they would not be shouted down, she complained to the organiser that this was a negative sounding meeting and asked people to attend to voice support for the occupation. This has actively oppressed the voices of disabled students seeking to speak to their representative officers."


So a load of disabled people that weren't prevented from accessing disability services, decided they needed a meeting to complain / or make one up in order to help counter some militants.  That's MORE plausible than the alternative version of events?


----------



## killer b (May 19, 2015)

andysays said:


> IMO the issue is not whether she is "black enough", whatever exactly people think that means, but that she has apparently countered various claims of wrong-doing on her part by saying
> 
> 
> She's using her BME position to attempt to deflect any criticism in an utterly dishonest and disengenuous way


Yeah, she's full of shit. Countering her shit by saying she isn't black enough doesn't strike me as the most effective method though. That we're discussing her at all seems a bit odd.


----------



## killer b (May 19, 2015)

isn't this the second thread on her? Who gives a fuck, really?


----------



## Spymaster (May 19, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> does she identify as white?



She probably doesn't identify as a fucking idiot either. Doesn't mean she isn't one.


----------



## Fingers (May 19, 2015)

killer b said:


> isn't this the second thread on her? Who gives a fuck, really?



Not as far as I know. I searched her name before I posted


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 19, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Within the subculture of the subculture (left-wing student politics) this is a totally valid, and indeed basically the only, response. Look at social media around the NUS elections and it's basically just student politics grouplets using this language against each other over and over. No actual politics or logical argumentation, just this stuff.



And in the end it still just comes down to which candidate has the most friends, or the bossiest friends. 

It also helps if your mates are studying philosophy or politics, not for debates or anything but because they'll have loads more free time to put up posters and stuff because they never have any proper work to do.


----------



## killer b (May 19, 2015)

Fingers said:


> Not as far as I know. I searched her name before I posted


Ah, it was someone else. Still, _interesting_ that in a world of idiot student politics, it's two ethnic minority women who get hauled into the stocks.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 19, 2015)

gosub said:


> From the petition: "This is especially relevant to the repercussions of the recent occupation she was involved in leading. During the occupation she booked a short amount of leave and then declared she was ‘on leave until further notice’, leaving students without an official Welfare and Diversity Officer. When asked to attend a meeting intended to allow disabled students to voice their concerns in a safe space where they would not be shouted down, she complained to the organiser that this was a negative sounding meeting and asked people to attend to voice support for the occupation. This has actively oppressed the voices of disabled students seeking to speak to their representative officers."
> 
> 
> So a load of disabled people that weren't prevented from accessing disability services, decided they needed a meeting to complain / or make one up in order to help counter some militants.  That's MORE plausible than the alternative version of events?


Depends who you think started the petition.


----------



## andysays (May 19, 2015)

killer b said:


> Yeah, she's full of shit. *Countering her shit by saying she isn't black enough* doesn't strike me as the most effective method though. That we're discussing her at all seems a bit odd.



In fact, if you go back and read the thread, this is not quite what happened, but this aspect is not one that I'm inclined to spend any more time on (  at self for my original response to you)


----------



## Fingers (May 19, 2015)

I find the whole thing rather depressing, she obviously has the ability to connect with people but I would rather it was put into something positive rather than hate speech targeted at sections of our society.  I feel the same about Tommy Robinson-Yaxley-Lennon.


----------



## gosub (May 19, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Depends who you think started the petition.




Fuck me if thats what the next generation of spin doctors are capable of, nobody's safe


----------



## Belushi (May 19, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> It also helps if your mates are studying philosophy or politics, not for debates or anything but because they'll have loads more free time to put up posters and stuff because they never have any proper work to do.



Fuck off! I studied Politics 

And had a grand total of eight hours lectures & seminars a week


----------



## BigTom (May 19, 2015)

gosub said:


> From the petition: "This is especially relevant to the repercussions of the recent occupation she was involved in leading. During the occupation she booked a short amount of leave and then declared she was ‘on leave until further notice’, leaving students without an official Welfare and Diversity Officer. When asked to attend a meeting intended to allow disabled students to voice their concerns in a safe space where they would not be shouted down, she complained to the organiser that this was a negative sounding meeting and asked people to attend to voice support for the occupation. This has actively oppressed the voices of disabled students seeking to speak to their representative officers."
> 
> 
> So a load of disabled people that weren't prevented from accessing disability services, decided they needed a meeting to complain / or make one up in order to help counter some militants.  That's MORE plausible than the alternative version of events?


Ah, I thought you were referring to the quote from Liz Hutchinson you'd posted up, which talked about the occupation preventing access to various student services, not to her taking a leave of absence and not being available as diversity officer in that time which I can believe and is very shitty. Having said that, most occupations have been pretty short lived so I've not heard of anyone taking a leave of absence before. I'd fully expect the uni to jump on and exaggerate acting they can as well.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 19, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Fuck off! I studied Politics
> 
> And had a grand total of eight hours lectures & seminars a week



Well there you go then, not exactly rushed off your feet were you?


----------



## Nice one (May 19, 2015)

The39thStep said:


> Next stop Clapton Ultras



closer than you think. The person she called white trash on twitter is tom harris (awl and dulwich hamlet fan) whose brother grassed up the cowdenbeath flying column lad to the police at the clapton game. Small fucking world.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 19, 2015)

gosub said:


> Fuck me if thats what the next generation of spin doctors are capable of, nobody's safe


What, starting a petition? That's hardly Level 10 Mandelson stuff.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 19, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Depends who you think started the petition.



Probably her mum.


----------



## Fingers (May 19, 2015)

Nice one said:


> closer than you think. The person she called white trash on twitter is tom harris (awl and dulwich hamlet fan) whose brother grassed up the cowdenbeath flying column lad to the police at the clapton game. Small fucking world.



Ah, small world indeed


----------



## cantsin (May 19, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Well if she was being paid to do stuff then she shouldnt be doing occupations although what exactly a diversity officer does day to day is anyones guess



Ie :,Just like Tories  complaints re:  union officials in pub sector


----------



## gosub (May 19, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> What, starting a petition? That's hardly Level 10 Mandelson stuff.



With the intial press release set up.  And a nice line in "those affected cannot come forward in public for fear of their safety" to fall back on the future.

Occum's razor.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 19, 2015)

editor said:


> If anyone has the time or energy:




I managed 41 seconds. Do I get a prize?


----------



## Belushi (May 19, 2015)

Nice one said:


> closer than you think. The person she called white trash on twitter is tom harris (awl and dulwich hamlet fan) whose brother grassed up the cowdenbeath flying column lad to the police at the clapton game. Small fucking world.



Bloody incestuous


----------



## J Ed (May 19, 2015)

Nice one said:


> closer than you think. The person she called white trash on twitter is tom harris (awl and dulwich hamlet fan) whose brother grassed up the cowdenbeath flying column lad to the police at the clapton game. Small fucking *toxic swamp*.



FTFY


----------



## gosub (May 19, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> I managed 41 seconds. Do I get a prize?


beat me


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 19, 2015)

gosub said:


> beat me



I most certainly will not. My mum warned me of your sort on the internets.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 19, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Fuck off! I studied Politics
> 
> And had a grand total of eight hours lectures & seminars a week


I had six (literary studies)


----------



## Pickman's model (May 19, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Fuck off! I studied Politics
> 
> And had a grand total of eight hours lectures & seminars a week


you should have done history, had six - and for one lovely year i had 3 hours a week for six months.


----------



## krink (May 19, 2015)

Is all this in that London then? I've never heard of this woman or goldsmiths. Is it a pawn shop?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 19, 2015)

krink said:


> Is all this in that London then? I've never heard of this woman or goldsmiths. Is it a pawn shop?


Student politics is literally all people talk about down here. I mean I was on the train this morning and I sit down and the bloke next to me says "so listen what do you think about the latest Goldsmiths suspension?" and I'm like "listen mate, seriously, I've not even read all my Instagram yet, I can't be expected to construct a meaningful position can I all right?" and he's all "only asking only asking" but I know he's thinking "lazy tart, should have read up on the latest before he left the house".


----------



## ska invita (May 19, 2015)

this video has had 214,080 views ...im stunned


----------



## frogwoman (May 20, 2015)

YOU'LL NEVER GUESS WHAT HAPPENED NEXT!


----------



## Flavour (May 20, 2015)

this is extremely depressing and boring


----------



## rekil (May 20, 2015)

ska invita said:


> this video has had 214,080 views ...im stunned


All them downvotes. It's probably doing the rounds in the MRA/Gamergate swamp.


----------



## editor (May 20, 2015)

ska invita said:


> this video has had 214,080 views ...im stunned


I imagine most people gave up watching pretty sharpish.


----------



## xenon (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you should have done history, had six - and for one lovely year i had 3 hours a week for six months.



Fine Art, 2 lectures a week IIRC. And you can sit in the bar nominally sketching whilst your paint / cley / car under sealant,  dries.


----------



## Chick Webb (May 20, 2015)

Flavour said:


> this is extremely depressing and boring


It's not. It's entirely unimportant and boring.  No need to let it depress you.


----------



## Spymaster (May 20, 2015)

Nice one said:


> .... (awl and dulwich hamlet fan) whose brother grassed up the cowdenbeath flying column lad...



Is this written in code?


----------



## ska invita (May 20, 2015)

copliker said:


> All them downvotes. It's probably doing the rounds in the MRA/Gamergate swamp.


ah of course - thats sad and makes me feel somewhat sorry for everyone involved (and being mocked)
To me student politics is a place to find yourself and cut your teeth a little, in the relatively safe space and small scale of the campus - whatever the rights and wrongs of this this isn't something that should be covered in national newspapers and shared hundreds of thousands of times on the internet.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I don't know why she's put herself in the sentence though. Women in general cannot be sexist towards men, and people from ethnic minorities cannot be racist towards the predominant ethnic group. But, like probably a great many other things, she only seems to be interested in this stuff as it pertains to her personally.
> 
> Also, 'not racist' does not necessarily mean 'not an idiot'.



She is very clear in that vid as to why she doesn't feel she can be 'racist or sexist'. _'Because racism and sexism describe structures of priviledge based on race and gender'._

Also, she obviously positioned herself in that sentence as the allegations are against her in particular.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

That baffled me a bit too. _why is she talking about herself, in this defence against an attack on her?_


----------



## The Flying Pig (May 20, 2015)

Naive stupid and childish speech so simple that if she and her ilk were not serious, it would be perfect for a comedy sketch.
Yet again a prime example of how the capitalist system fukks up and confuses our brains.


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 20, 2015)

gosub said:


> what is the role/responsibilities of a Diversity Officer?



Paid 40 grand to do fuck all.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

> ‘It’s a way of reclaiming the power from the trauma many of us experience as queers, women, people of colour, who are on the receiving end of racism, misogyny and homophobia daily’, she said.



I don't buy this explanation either. The way to reclaim power for me is the opposite...not to internalise and start using the very same perjorative insults. IME working through/out trauma isn't best served by mimicking the very things/structures/insults that oppress in the first place.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> why? i'm not sure what the answer is. if there is an answer. what is a white person? what is a brown person? what is a black person? are you brave enough to state clearly which is which?



Like this diversity officer does you mean?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Like this diversity officer does you mean?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


>



She gets to decide who are white.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> She gets to decide who are white.


Does she? What are you on about? Be clear


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Does she? What are you on about? Be clear



So the white men she's referring to are hypothetical?


----------



## Spymaster (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Does she? What are you on about? Be clear





> Bahar Mustafa, the university’s welfare and diversity officer, previously came under fire after banning white people and men from an event that aimed to focus on diversifying the curriculum.



She excluded white people on the basis of their skin colour. Not "people who identify as white".

She is an arsehole.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So the white men she's referring to are hypothetical?


What?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Like this diversity officer does you mean?


she's foolhardy enough anyway


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Artaxerxes said:


> Paid 40 grand to do fuck all.


I'm sure some diversity officers swing the lead (and this one seems to be a penis), but are you really questioning the validity of a role for someone to provide advocacy and representation for minority groups within an institution?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> She excluded white people on the basis of their skin colour. Not "people who identify as white".
> 
> She is an arsehole.


She clearly is.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> What?


oh ffs why not at least attempt to engage brain


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> oh ffs why not at least attempt to engage brain


I'm just not following C66's questions. There seems to he missing information.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> What?



Are you being deliberately obtuse? You said to pickman's that he couldn't make the judgement call regarding someone's colour of skin in defence of someone doing exactly that.


----------



## Spymaster (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Are you being deliberately obtuse? You said to pickman's that he couldn't make the judgement call regarding someone's colour of skin in defence of someone doing exactly that.



Put a comma between_ skin_ and _in_ otherwise he'll get even more confused!


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Are you being deliberately obtuse? You said to pickman's that he couldn't make the judgement call regarding someone's colour of skin in defence of someone doing exactly that.


I wasn't defending her. I was criticising people for saying that someone who didn't identify as white was white.
[Pedant mode]deliberately obtuse is a tautology [/pedant mode]


----------



## Diamond (May 20, 2015)

One of her central arguments seems to be - because I am Turkic, I cannot be racist.

Pretty odd one when set against the Armenian genocide...

And then her wider point is that all ethnic minorities can _never_ be racist, which is even more bizarre.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I wasn't defending her. I was criticising people for saying that someone who didn't identify as white was white.
> [Pedant mode]deliberately obtuse is a tautology [/pedant mode]



Ergo you're criticising her. You weren't earlier.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Ergo you're criticising her. You weren't earlier.


So? I wasn't defending her. I didn't think I needed to state that calling for all white men to be killed wasn't a very wise thing to do.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Read back through your own argument and how it ends up disagreeing with itself.


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> I'm sure some diversity officers swing the lead (and this one seems to be a penis), but are you really questioning the validity of a role for someone to provide advocacy and representation for minority groups within an institution?



I'm sure there is a role for it, I'm doubtful how often that role is actually useful and not just used to tick another box. 

Better engagement with faculty and students would be better and cross cultural events appealing to both minorities and majorities would be good.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Read back through your own argument and how it ends up disagreeing with itself.


How so?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> i don't doubt she's said some unwise things and perhaps should not be working as a diversity officer, but why are people saying she is white herself? it's not up to you


Ahem.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> How so?



have you read it?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> have you read it?


Yes


----------



## brogdale (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I didn't think I needed to state that calling for all white men to be killed wasn't a very wise thing to do.



Indeed not. Doesn't the state have a view on that sort of thing? Incitement?


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Artaxerxes said:


> I'm sure there is a role for it, I'm doubtful how often that role is actually useful and not just used to tick another box.
> 
> Better engagement with faculty and students would be better and cross cultural events appealing to both minorities and majorities would be good.


Have you ever needed to access the services provided by a diversity officer?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

ska invita said:


> ah of course - thats sad and makes me feel somewhat sorry for everyone involved (and being mocked)
> To me student politics is a place to find yourself and cut your teeth a little, in the relatively safe space and small scale of the campus - whatever the rights and wrongs of this this isn't something that should be covered in national newspapers and shared hundreds of thousands of times on the internet.


you'd say the same if it was a white diversity officer at goldsmiths saying kill all blacks or muslims?


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> Have you ever needed to access the services provided by a diversity officer?



As an evil white-cis male I have not.

I have never known anyone take them seriously or use the services and I went to a college with around 40-50% asian students if that counts though.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

You have black friends? Thanks for letting me know.


----------



## friedaweed (May 20, 2015)

I went to Goldsmiths. They let all sorts of idiots in there


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> You have black friends? Thanks for letting me know.



No I've not actually, but then I've got no white friends either


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Artaxerxes said:


> As an evil white-cis male I have not.


Also, give over with this.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

what does the cis stand for?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)




----------



## DaveCinzano (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I had six (literary studies)


Presumably 'read the name of the forum in which you are posting' was only covered in hour seven?


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 20, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> YOU'LL NEVER GUESS WHAT HAPPENED NEXT!


That nearly gave me hiccups


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> what does the cis stand for?



Not sure but its thrown out in a lot of these articles by both sides, think it means straight.

edit: I'm staying out of this from now on, way out of my depth and only posting because bored shitless.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> Presumably 'read the name of the forum in which you are posting' was only covered in hour seven?


Give over.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

she is encouraging hatred instead of change and understanding and she should be sacked off sharpish. it's offensive. you can talk about power structures and privilage all your like, but if my black neighbours on my street started talking like that to me or my family, i'd want them arrested, just like if hte whites on my street started talking like that about my black neighbours. just because she's a student and a diversity officer shouldn't make any difference.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> what does the cis stand for?



That you have the temerity to fancy women I think.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> what does the cis stand for?


It's not an abbreviation, it's a prefix from Latin for 'on this side' as opposed to trans- as a prefix


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> It's not an abbreviation, it's a prefix from Latin for 'on this side' as opposed to trans- as a prefix


thanks.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> That you have the temerity to fancy women I think.


No


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> she is encouraging hatred instead of change and understanding and she should be sacked off sharpish. it's offensive. you can talk about power structures and privilage all your like, but if my black neighbours on my street started talking like that to me or my family, i'd want them arrested, just like if hte whites on my street started talking like that about my black neighbours.


this is true. I don't think anyone is saying what she said is ok.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> No



It doesn't mean straight then?


----------



## tufty79 (May 20, 2015)

Nope.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

What does it mean then?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

this?

A “cis” person is a person who was assigned a gender and sex at birth that they feel comfortable with. Typically, cis men are men who were assigned male at birth and feel that the words "man" and "male" accurately describe who they are. Likewise, cis women are women who were assigned female at birth and feel that the words "woman" and "female" accurately describe who they are. Generally, cis people feel comfortable with the aspects of their bodies that others inscribe with a sex and gender, and do not seek to modify their bodies in ways that would change how they or others place them in a sex category.


----------



## tufty79 (May 20, 2015)

Pretty much.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

so as i identify, i guess, with being a man i am a CIS?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

ok, clear now. carry on.


----------



## Blagsta (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> what does the cis stand for?



Cissy


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

sacking - yes.
brutalised over the internet and media - no.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

So no white gay men allowed either then?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

What about white men with disabilities? They can fuck off aswell?


----------



## krink (May 20, 2015)

cis means normal



*runs away


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> What does it mean then?


Surprised you haven't bothered to find out. And what's with that phrase 'the temerity to fancy women'. It doesn't just apply to men. And that sarcasm is uncalled for, reeks of 'but what about the mens'


----------



## dylanredefined (May 20, 2015)

copliker said:


> All them downvotes. It's probably doing the rounds in the MRA/Gamergate swamp.



Gamer gate is about ethics in journalism though and not about hate.

Of course it was shared by that lot. Video evidence of how they are oppressed by sjw how could they resist it?


----------



## ska invita (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> you'd say the same if it was a white diversity officer at goldsmiths saying kill all blacks or muslims?


when that situation arises be sure to start a thread and tag me


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Surprised you haven't bothered to find out. And what's with that phrase 'the temerity to fancy women'. It doesn't just apply to men. And that sarcasm is uncalled for, reeks of 'but what about the mens'



The context of this conversation is about men is it not? Hence why I didn't mention women. You love all this box ticking crap don't you?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> The context of this conversation is about men is it not? Hence why I didn't mention women. You love all this box ticking crap don't you?


What do you mean by 'box-ticking crap'?


----------



## gosub (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> What about white men with disabilities? They can fuck off aswell?



at least they have ramps and loos, where are the special loos for ethnic lesbians?


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

jesus.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

This thread is getting dangerously close to someone saying 'political correctness gone mad'


----------



## Fingers (May 20, 2015)

100 pages +


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 20, 2015)

Thread of the week!


----------



## tufty79 (May 20, 2015)

krink said:


> cis means normal
> 
> 
> 
> *runs away


Ffs.


----------



## Spymaster (May 20, 2015)

Artaxerxes said:


> Thread of the week!



I'm still trying to figure out who's arguing what.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> What do you mean by 'box-ticking crap'?



Why do we need to search for reasons to divide people? You can think I'm right wing all you like but it's not me who is identifying people based on their colour and attaching a value to it. Who else does that? Go on, have a guess.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

this'll be 36 pages deep by 6pm.


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 20, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> I'm still trying to figure out who's arguing what.



At this point its a free for all and theres no clear point or winner




Citizen66 said:


> Why do we need to search for reasons to divide people? You can think I'm right wing all you like but it's not me who is identifying people based on their colour and attaching a value to it. Who else does that? Go on, have a guess.



Hitler...? 

[/godwins law reached]


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Why do we need to search for reasons to divide people? You can think I'm right wing all you like but it's not me who is identifying people based on their colour and attaching a value to it. Who else does that? Go on, have a guess.


Who's searching for reasons to divide people? And why do you think being insensitive is a particularly right wing thing? The left also has a record of belittling other people's experiences.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Why do we need to search for reasons to divide people? You can think I'm right wing all you like but it's not me who is identifying people based on their colour and attaching a value to it. Who else does that? Go on, have a guess.


you seem to have constructed an argument for orang that he has no interest in making.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> you seem to have constructed an argument for orang that he has no interest in making.



Of course he has no interest in accepting that it's divisive.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 20, 2015)

Can't we all just agree to agree that the world has gone mad?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Of course he has no interest in accepting that it's divisive.


That what is divisive? Being sensitive to how people identify themselves?


----------



## friedaweed (May 20, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> I'm still trying to figure out who's arguing what.


It's given me a headache


----------



## articul8 (May 20, 2015)

krink said:


> cis means normal
> 
> 
> 
> *runs away


you heternormative bastard


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> That what is divisive? Being sensitive to how people identify themselves?



Lumping all white men together as one homogenous block and barring them from places achieves this how? It's like the left's version of all scousers will rob your trainers.


----------



## co-op (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> That what is divisive? Being sensitive to how people identify themselves?



White people identifying as black? Men identifying as women? The whole concept of "cis" (when it's defined in opposition to trans) is very close to some real reactionary bullshit.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> This thread is getting dangerously close to someone saying 'political correctness gone mad'


I always know my week is going south when I find myself umming and ahhing over whether to 'Like' a post by either you or DotCommunist, social media bellwethers such as you both are


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 20, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> I'm still trying to figure out who's arguing what.


It's a bit like a biker brawl in a titty bar car park


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Lumping all white men together as one homogenous block and barring them from places achieves this how? It's like the left's version of all scousers will rob your trainers.


Who's doing that? You keep attacking arguments that no one on this thread is making


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> I always know my week is going south when I find myself umming and ahhing over whether to 'Like' a post by either you or DotCommunist, social media bellwethers such as you both are


Fuck off then, you passive aggressive wanker. ETA:


----------



## Belushi (May 20, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> It's a bit like a biker brawl in a titty bar car park



It was a Brestaurant  much classier


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

co-op said:


> White people identifying as black? Men identifying as women? The whole concept of "cis" (when it's defined in opposition to trans) is very close to some real reactionary bullshit.


You tell a Turkish Cypriot that they are white. I dare you.


----------



## Belushi (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> You tell a Turkish Cypriot that they are white. I dare you.



Why? Turks I've known consider themselves white   I don't know about Turkish Cypriots but Greek Cypriots certainly consider themselves white.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 20, 2015)

How is this student defining 'white', by the way?


----------



## Up the junction (May 20, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> .. social media bellwethers such as you both are


bahhh none.

I really like the way so many people on here quietly seethe and loathe each other. You must all have been here a long time.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 20, 2015)

Belushi said:


>


STICK YOUR PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE SMILEYS UP YOUR ARSE


----------



## editor (May 20, 2015)

Up the junction said:


> I really like the way so many people on here quietly seethe and loathe each other. You must all have been here a long time.


You're by far one of the worst offenders on that score, sunshine.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 20, 2015)

Up the junction said:


> bahhh none.
> 
> I really like the way so many people on here quietly seethe and loathe each other. You must all have been here a long time.


Affection acksually


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Who's doing that? You keep attacking arguments that no one on this thread is making



Fucking hell. How dare I discuss the actual topic.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Why? Turks I've known consider themselves white   I don't know about Turkish Cypriots but Greek Cypriots certainly consider themselves white.


And I've worked with Turkish Cypriots who don't identify as white. Which is why it is up to them to identify as white or not.


----------



## Up the junction (May 20, 2015)

editor said:


> You're by far one of the worst offenders on that score, sunshine.


If I do it quietly, I am in error.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> How is this student defining 'white', by the way?


I don't think she has. Not in her tweets, anyway.


----------



## Diamond (May 20, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> How is this student defining 'white', by the way?



Vaguely.

I have lots of red hair and pretty much translucently white skin. I do not, however, consider myself to be any more or less white than my friends of a more Mediterranean hue.

Does that mean anything?


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

no.


----------



## Up the junction (May 20, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Vaguely.
> 
> I have lots of red hair and pretty much translucently white skin. I do not, however, consider myself to be any more or less white than my friends of a more Mediterranean hue.
> 
> Does that mean anything?


It means you tan well. Probably on a pro bono basis.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Surprised you haven't bothered to find out.



Asking what it means is not bothering to find out?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Asking what it means is not bothering to find out?


Until now. As you're such an active member of Urban75, I was surprised.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

it's a bit disingenuous of you tbf C66. Of course you knew what it means.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Until now. As you're such an active member of Urban75, I was surprised.



It doesn't even make sense. Surely someone who identifies as a woman is a woman? If I'm male and identify as such why do I need a special word? Anyway I thought it was gender normative or some such. I tend to glaze over with it all tbh.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> it's a bit disingenuous of you tbf C66. Of course you knew what it means.



I was pretending to think it meant homosexual? Why?


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It doesn't even make sense. Surely someone who identifies as a woman is a woman? If I'm male and identify as such why do I need a special word? Anyway I thought it was gender normative or some such. I tend to glaze over with it all tbh.



Do we have to start with explaining trans first, or are you familiar with that?


----------



## Dowie (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> And I've worked with Turkish Cypriots who don't identify as white. Which is why it is up to them to identify as white or not.



So if you happened to work with some red haired Irish people who didn't identify as white does it also follow that it is also now up to them?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 20, 2015)

I predict someone will bring up Otherkin in about 3 posts time.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I was pretending to think it meant homosexual? Why?


I dunno. You're being quite strange tbf.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 20, 2015)

Shit. I just brought them up.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

Dowie said:


> So if you happened to work with some red haired Irish people who didn't identify as white does it also follow that it is also now up to them?


I don't know


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

The thread is full of people constructing huge strawmen to throw shit at. Odd, when the target was so clear in the first place.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

and where do otherkins fit into all this?


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

they don't.


----------



## tufty79 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> they don't.


Oppressor


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 20, 2015)

Otherkins don't fit in anywhere.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Otherkins don't fit in anywhere.


They have tumblr, surely that's enough?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> They have tumblr, surely that's enough?



You'll tolerate us just so long as we stay on the reservation, eh? 

*scurries off to forage for nuts and twigs.*


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> they don't.


facist.


----------



## frogwoman (May 20, 2015)

9 pages, wow.


----------



## co-op (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> You tell a Turkish Cypriot that they are white. I dare you.



I don't know how old you are but I can remember when the TCs I knew would make a point of identifying as white, although they wouldn't have called it "identifying" and you'd have been in trouble if you called them black.


----------



## Up the junction (May 20, 2015)

So it's a binary choice. Out of curiosity, who decided that?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> I dunno. You're being quite strange tbf.



Seeing people as people rather than by their skin colour is 'weird'?


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

see what I was saying about those strawmen?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Otherkins don't fit in anywhere.


the useless wankers.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 20, 2015)

Up the junction said:


> So it's a binary choice. Out of curiosity, who decided that?


Mathematicians?


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> They have tumblr, surely that's enough?


"First they came for the LJers..."


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 20, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> 9 pages, wow.


Shoulder to the wheel and we _shall_ meet our Ten Page Plan targets, cme!


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> see what I was saying about those strawmen?


what about strawwomen?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> what about strawwomen?



Strawkin?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

strawberry or get the fuck off.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

fuck teh strawman, i'm sick of the cunt


----------



## andysays (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> see what I was saying about those strawmen?



Funnily enough, the very first straw man comment on this thread was yours


killer b said:


> I cant see where she's claimed to be black, tbf.


At which point no one had claimed she had claimed to be black.

And while we're on about pots calling kettles black, your comment of


killer b said:


> You have black friends? Thanks for letting me know.



in response to this


Artaxerxes said:


> As an evil white-cis male I have not.
> 
> I have never known anyone take them seriously or use the services and I went to a college with around 40-50% asian students if that counts though.


was last seen following the yellow brick road with Dorothy, the Tin Man and the Cowardly Lion.

ETA and Toto of course - thanks to AuntiStella for the reminder and apologies to all WofO fans...


----------



## Louis MacNeice (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> You tell a Turkish Cypriot that they are white. I dare you.


 
Son of a Turkish Cypriot and onetime BNP councillor, Lawrence Rustem, seems at least equivocal/confused on the issue; 'our party [BNP]doesn't recruit non-white members'. 

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

​


----------



## likesfish (May 20, 2015)

Think shes confused tumblr with real life if she had not put up that idiotic notice nobody would know or care about her cant imagine their was a massive queue  of straight white students wanting to go to her meeting  complaining that people have spread her moronic actions far and wide welcome to social media


DaveCinzano said:


> It's a bit like a biker brawl in a titty bar car park


 without deaths injurys automatic gunfire  obviously or attractive waitresses in skimpy outfits serving beers and nachos ​


----------



## co-op (May 20, 2015)

I remember Shirley Bassey saying when she was a kid she'd have punched you out if you called her black. Hence "coloured".


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

andysays said:


> in response to this
> 
> was last seen following the yellow brick road with Dorothy, the Tin Man and the Cowardly Lion.



Toto?


----------



## frogwoman (May 20, 2015)

Just stop giving this irrelevant shit the oxygen of publicity tbh.


----------



## frogwoman (May 20, 2015)

9 pages on some goldsmith bollocks. Really? Who fucking cares?


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> Just stop giving this irrelevant shit the oxygen of publicity tbh.


Aye this shit would normally stay pretty much in the realms of student-life if it wasn't for people that seem determined to make it bigger than it is.


----------



## andysays (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Toto?



See edit


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

what's WoFO? /old-lady-aspie-mode


----------



## Orang Utan (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> what's WoFO? /old-lady-aspie-mode


Toto, the Tin Man, the Cowardly Lion? Take a wild guess!


----------



## Blagsta (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> what's WoFO? /old-lady-aspie-mode



Wizard of Fucking Oz


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

It's an Aspie thing, honest 

I thought it meant Waste of fucking organs and was ready to be offended :-p


----------



## andysays (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> It's an Aspie thing, honest
> 
> I thought it meant Waste of fucking organs and was ready to be offended :-p



Just as well you asked for clarification before getting offended - if only everyone here followed that policy...


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> see what I was saying about those strawmen?



Maybe Worzel should be added to the wheel of oppression.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

who's offended?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> who's offended?


we're offended 

that's a chant for the next demo


----------



## DotCommunist (May 20, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> I always know my week is going south when I find myself umming and ahhing over whether to 'Like' a post by either you or DotCommunist, social media bell*wethers *such as you both are


i think you mean ends.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Maybe Worzel should be added to the wheel of oppression.


I'm not sure dismissing every argument where race or gender come up as intersectionalist is a great idea.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> Do we have to start with explaining trans first, or are you familiar with that?



Transgender or transvestite?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> 9 pages on some goldsmith bollocks. Really? Who fucking cares?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> I'm not sure dismissing every argument where race or gender come up as intersectionalist is a great idea.



It is in this instance though, isn't it?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Transgender or transvestite?


trans-siberian or transbaikal?


----------



## 8ball (May 20, 2015)

If not sacked she should definitely be sent for re-training since killing all white men leads to a net reduction in diversity.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> trans-siberian or transbaikal?


transport for london.


----------



## Blagsta (May 20, 2015)

Cis Europe Express


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Transgender or transvestite?


Trans is an umbrella term and usually includes both


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

8ball said:


> If not sacked she should definitely be sent for re-training since killing all white men leads to a net reduction in diversity.


3 day residential written all over it. keep her receipts for claim back on meals.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> transport for london.


what about port of london?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> what about port of london?


no.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

8ball said:


> If not sacked she should definitely be sent for re-training since killing all white men leads to a net reduction in diversity.


depends how you measure it


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> 3 day residential written all over it. keep her receipts for claim back on meals.


claim back?


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Transgender or transvestite?


Trans*


----------



## 8ball (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> depends how you measure it


 
I'm measuring it with my lucky blue diversity stick and it says I'm right.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> Trans*


I always forget that pesky asterisk


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> Trans*


reminds me of the auld sisters of mercy song, long trans.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I always forget that pesky asterisk


Me too


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> reminds me of the auld sisters of mercy song, long trans.


Don't know that one


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> Me too


----------



## SpineyNorman (May 20, 2015)

Can't be arsed to read the thread - can someone please tell me 1) is she as big a Fucking idiot as she sounds and 2) should I give a fuck?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

SpineyNorman said:


> Can't be arsed to read the thread - can someone please tell me 1) is she as big a Fucking idiot as she sounds and 2) should I give a fuck?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


yes and yes.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

SpineyNorman said:


> Can't be arsed to read the thread - can someone please tell me 1) is she as big a Fucking idiot as she sounds and 2) should I give a fuck?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


1) yes, 2) no.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> 1) yes, 2) no.


you've got 2) wrong. we care about such things at urban and if you're not down the with the message then perhaps you're not as urban as we all thought.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

SpineyNorman said:


> Can't be arsed to read the thread - can someone please tell me 1) is she as big a Fucking idiot as she sounds and 2) should I give a fuck?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


1) depends 2) depends


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I always forget that pesky asterisk


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


>


I'm more post punk than Goth


----------



## DotCommunist (May 20, 2015)

in the funhouse mirror version you have these wankers ruining the years highest sci fi novel awards by rigging the slate system to combat 'positive discrimination' because someone without a nob wrote some good sci fi. Crying over mad max *gasp* having a female in it and so on.


Still. At least these goldsmith intersectional nobs have yet to reach the depths of rape threats and real life stalking so we can't really compare.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

Well there was that spitting and bottling incident....


----------



## DotCommunist (May 20, 2015)

didn't ruin my sci fi reading schedule did it?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 20, 2015)

Anyway, on a serious note, this sort of thing is not identity politics. It's plastic sectarianism.


----------



## gosub (May 20, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Anyway, on a serious note, this sort of thing is not identity politics. It's plastic sectarianism.



Don't knock plastic sectarianism.  It makes recycling easier.


----------



## Nylock (May 20, 2015)

"Sepultura rules, Metallica suck!".
"Metallica rules, Sepultura suck!".
Metal sectariansim.....















/coat


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It is in this instance though, isn't it?


No. I dont give a shit about Bahar Mustafa. I do care about some people's response to her nonsense on here, which has been a bit dodgy. No intersectionalism involved.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

It shouldn't be hard to counter the ridiculous and divisive antics of Bahar Mustafa and her ilk with a sensible acknowledgement that there are varying types and degrees of minorities, exclusion and oppression - without a descent into opposing ridiculousness and divisiveness.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> No. I dont give a shit about Bahar Mustafa. I do care about some people's response to her nonsense on here, which has been a bit dodgy. No intersectionalism involved.



Why use the word 'cis' if it's got nothing to do with privilege politics?


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

I haven't used the word 'cis'


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Why use the word 'cis' if it's got nothing to do with privilege politics?


Cis is just a word/shorthand to describe what isn't trans*. In itself it's no more privilege politics than "straight" is. It's pointless rejecting a useful word just because you don't like the context in which it's used by a few students.


----------



## gosub (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Why use the word 'cis' if it's got nothing to do with privilege politics?



In solidarity with the Winter Olympic boycott.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> I haven't used the word 'cis'



I'm referring to the diversity officer. You know, the topic.



cesare said:


> Cis is just a word/shorthand to describe what isn't trans*. In itself it's no more privilege politics than "straight" is. It's pointless rejecting a useful word just because you don't like the context in which it's used by a few students.



Well if it's of any use to you, I haven't met anybody who describes themselves as cis.


----------



## CNT36 (May 20, 2015)

*SilenceoftheSams*‏@SamAmbreen
I bet all the people giving @RooftopJaxx a hard time right now are urban 75

0 retweets0 favorites




5:28 AM - 20 May 2015


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Well if it's of any use to you, I haven't met anybody who describes themselves as cis.



Maybe that's because you're not trans. I hear people using it all the time in the same way non gay people describe themselves as 'straight' to gay people.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Well if it's of any use to you, I haven't met anybody who describes themselves as cis.


It's only of any use to me in giving me an understanding of your personal experiences, unless you're suggesting that anything should be extrapolated from those?


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm referring to the diversity officer. You know, the topic.


Everyone on the thread thinks she's a bellend. What do you think you're arguing about?


----------



## DotCommunist (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> It shouldn't be hard to counter the ridiculous and divisive antics of Bahar Mustafa and her ilk with a sensible acknowledgement that there are varying types and degrees of minorities, exclusion and oppression - without a descent into opposing ridiculousness and divisiveness.



a fucking men

thing is- in context looking at things like intersectionality does with that 'check your priv' can be useful. I've said this before. Never really considered it privcheck though, just counting my blessings like the pious man should. The idea of identifying where class/race/economic status and so on intersect is not inherently an evil thing. When urbans biggest fan sam ambreen was on here I saw the opposite of a useful analytic tool. 

its just clowns ruining things again.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> Everyone on the thread thinks she's a bellend. What do you think you're arguing about?



What did you think you were arguing about?


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> What did you think you were arguing about?





killer b said:


> some people's response to her nonsense on here, which has been a bit dodgy.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's only of any use to me in giving me an understanding of your personal experiences, unless you're suggesting that anything should be extrapolated from those?



You wouldn't be able to understand my personal experiences without me giving myself a bunch of labels?


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> You wouldn't be able to understand my personal experiences without me giving myself a bunch of labels?


That's not what I said. What I said was that (to paraphrase) your personal experience of never having met anyone that describes themselves as "Cis" is only useful to me as an indication of your personal experiences, not whether or not "Cis" is useful as a term.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> That's not what I said. What I said was that (to paraphrase) your personal experience of never having met anyone that describes themselves as "Cis" is only useful to me as an indication of your personal experiences, not whether or not "Cis" is useful as a term.



Ah right. I'll store it in the memory bank should it be needed. Perhaps when Im auto banned from some space or another.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Ah right. I'll store it in the memory bank should it be needed. Perhaps when Im auto banned from some space or another.


Think yourself lucky - I don't have to reach far into my memory when someone tries to exclude me from a space for being trans.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Have you ever been banned from a space, citizen? Apart from women-only afternoon at the swimming baths?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> Have you ever been banned from a space, citizen? Apart from women-only afternoon at the swimming baths?



Because something has never happened it never can? Tbh I've only become aware of this stuff relatively recently.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Think yourself lucky - I don't have to reach far into my memory when someone tries to exclude me from a space for being trans.



But Im on your side and against that.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

labelling me white male cis, although accurate, makes me guilty of things I'm not imo.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Ah right. I'll store it in the memory bank should it be needed. Perhaps when Im auto banned from some space or another.


 
It's just an atonym, like straight is to gay, or non-disabled is to disabled. Its difficult to discuss things like disability or transgenderism without a term to refer to people who are not transgendered or disabled, and as was hilariously pointed out earlier in the thread, without a specific antonym then there is a temptation to use the word 'normal' which is obviously a bit shit.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Think yourself lucky - I don't have to reach far into my memory when someone tries to exclude me from a space for being trans.


It doesn't seem right to "like" that, AuntiStella, but exclusion and worse is the reality of many trans people isn't it


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> It's just an atonym, like straight is to gay, or non-disabled is to disabled. Its difficult to discuss things like disability or transgenderism without a term to refer to people who are not transgendered or disabled, and as was hilariously pointed out earlier in the thread, without a specific antonym then there is a temptation to use the word 'normal' which is obviously a bit shit.



Fair enough. I guess it's because I only seem to come across it in what I deem to be divisive circumstances that it gets my back up.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> labelling me white male cis, although accurate, makes me guilty of things I'm not imo.


does excluding you from women-only afternoon at the swimming baths do that too?


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> labelling me white male cis, although accurate, makes me guilty of things I'm not imo.


Firstly its not a label, its a descriptive term like straight or white. Secondly, it carries no guilt or accusation. One does not choose to be cis. One just is. I love many cis people. My boyfriend is white, cis and hetereosexual and I still love him very much! Thirdly, if you support trans people then please don't reject the word trans as refusal to use trans results in trans people being excluded. For example, a cis woman differentiating herself from trans women will use such pejorative terms as "real", "genetic", "born" or "normal". Cis helps us avoid all of that!


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> It doesn't seem right to "like" that, AuntiStella, but exclusion and worse is the reality of many trans people isn't it


It is. 

I'm relatively lucky as I seem to be able to pass as a cis woman in most places, though I have had some trouble in loos and I tend to avoid other "women only" spaces which is fine as I hate sport and I don't feel the need to go to feminist spaces that exclude trans people! 

TBH in my case - its fear of exclusion that I have to endure when I use toilets, etc.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> does excluding you from women-only afternoon at the swimming baths do that too?



Theres nuances to this, no? What about women being banned from golf clubs?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Firstly its not a label, its a descriptive term like straight or white. Secondly, it carries no guilt or accusation. One does not choose to be cis. One just is. I love many cis people. My boyfriend is white, cis and hetereosexual and I still love him very much! Thirdly, if you support trans people then please don't reject the word trans as refusal to use trans results in trans people being excluded. For example, a cis woman differentiating herself from trans women will use such pejorative terms as "real", "genetic", "born" or "normal". Cis helps us avoid all of that!



It does on the wheel of privilege. I've seen it in action. And I haven't rejected the word trans.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It does on the wheel of privilege. I've seen it in action. And I haven't rejected the word trans.


challenge that but don't reject "cis". If you accept trans then logically you must accept cis as its opposite.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> challenge that but don't reject "cis". If you accept trans then logically you must accept cis as its opposite.



Yeah I conceded that.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Yeah I conceded that.


OK - obviously I'm not keeping up :-p


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> OK - obviously I'm not keeping up :-p



Post #335


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Theres nuances to this, no? What about women being banned from golf clubs?


The tendency of white 'cis' men (for want of a better term...) to take over and dominate discussions is a well documented and not particularly controversial phenomenon to raise. As such, women only (or BME only) meetings seem - in the absence of a world where equality is an actual reality - a reasonable response. Excluding you no more labels you a racist or a sexist or whatever than excluding you from women-only afternoon at the swimming baths labels you a rapist.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> It is.
> 
> I'm relatively lucky as I seem to be able to pass as a cis woman in most places, though I have had some trouble in loos and I tend to avoid other "women only" spaces which is fine as I hate sport and I don't feel the need to go to feminist spaces that exclude trans people!
> 
> TBH in my case - its fear of exclusion that I have to endure when I use toilets, etc.


Other trans people have told me that the use of toilets and exclusion (and/or fear of exclusion) is a particular issue, and it's reflected in my own experiences of people transitioning at work - it seems to bring out the worst in people.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Post #335


well, I'm not surprised I missed that. But OK - thanks for that!


----------



## Citizen66 (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> The tendency of white 'cis' men (for want of a better term...) to take over and dominate discussions is a well documented and not particularly controversial phenomenon to raise. As such, women only (or BME only) meetings seem - in the absence of a world where equality is an actual reality - a reasonable response. Excluding you no more labels you a racist or a sexist or whatever than excluding you from women-only afternoon at the swimming baths labels you a rapist.



I'm not against women only groups and I agree that what you describe exists. I think it's preferable that political groups are mixed though. Otherwise it's just perpetuating the problem.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> Other trans people have told me that the use of toilets and exclusion (and/or fear of exclusion) is a particular issue, and it's reflected in my own experiences of people transitioning at work - it seems to bring out the worst in people.


apart from one time when i was called an arse bandit by a contractor in one of our railway depots, I've not had much trouble at work. But transitioning was hard work - making sure people understood what it was I was going through and telling them what was and what was not acceptable. In my experience people tended to err on the side of caution and really treated me with kid gloves which was not required. They seemed to forget I was the same person as the bloke who had already done 24 years on the railways!!


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm not against women only groups and I agree that what you describe exists. I think it's preferable that political groups are mixed though. Otherwise it's just perpetuating the problem.


Mixed but with every effort made to make sure every subgroup is able to express themselves.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> apart from one time when i was called an arse bandit by a contractor in one of our railway depots, I've not had much trouble at work. But transitioning was hard work - making sure people understood what it was I was going through and telling them what was and what was not acceptable. In my experience people tended to err on the side of caution and really treated me with kid gloves which was not required. They seemed to forget I was the same person as the bloke who had already done 24 years on the railways!!


I guess they were erring on the side of caution so as not to say or do something offensive and ended up forgetting you-still-as-a-person-they-know as an unintended consequence. Did your employer help with information for your colleagues so you didn't have to do it all yourself?


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> Did your employer help with information for your colleagues so you didn't have to do it all yourself?


Nope. I had to do everything myself. My manager helped me with writing the email I sent to my colleagues but apart from that I had to fight for everything all the way!!


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> I guess they were erring on the side of caution so as not to say or do something offensive and ended up forgetting you-still-as-a-person-they-know as an unintended consequence.



I guess in a way I wasn't the person they thought they knew - at that point I didn't even know myself until I transitioned. They only knew who I was pretending to be!

But my boss tried to stop me going on site and made me do more officey admin stuff which is just sexist bullshit!!!


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm not against women only groups and I agree that what you describe exists. I think it's preferable that political groups are mixed though. Otherwise it's just perpetuating the problem.


Me too, but I can totally understand why some might choose to go for exclusionary groups, especially as


AuntiStella said:


> Mixed but with every effort made to make sure every subgroup is able to express themselves.


 is what intersectionality (in theory) attempts to achieve. And you've already rejected intersectionality...


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> you've already rejected intersectionality...


did I? When?


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

C66 has, I was just quoting your post as an example - sorry if it wasn't obvious.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Nope. I had to do everything myself. My manager helped me with writing the email I sent to my colleagues but apart from that I had to fight for everything all the way!!


Bloody hell! I think that's remiss of your employer not to be more actively supportive. There's loads they could and should have done.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I guess in a way I wasn't the person they thought they knew - at that point I didn't even know myself until I transitioned. They only knew who I was pretending to be!
> 
> But my boss tried to stop me going on site and made me do more officey admin stuff which is just sexist bullshit!!!


That's outrageous sexist shite innit, wtaf


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> Bloody hell! I think that's remiss of your employer not to be more actively supportive. There's loads they could and should have done.


Yep!! I'm now involved with the LGBT+ network trying to make sure other trans people get better treatment - and I'm mentoring a young trans person too to make sure they are able to access all the services they should be.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Yep!! I'm now involved with the LGBT+ network trying to make sure other trans people get better treatment - and I'm mentoring a young trans person too to make sure they are able to access all the services they should be.


Have you considered writing guidelines for employers?


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> Have you considered writing guidelines for employers?



There are good guidelines already available - its just a matter of employers taking them on board.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> There are good guidelines already available - its just a matter of employers taking them on board.


It's a bit of a chicken and egg situation - I don't doubt that there are good guidelines available but they're mostly accessible to employers actively looking for them, iyswim. For many employers they don't even think to look for them and their policies are confined to a generic policy on gender recognition (if that) which doesn't tend to cover practicalities and raising awareness.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's a bit of a chicken and egg situation - I don't doubt that there are good guidelines available but they're mostly accessible to employers actively looking for them, iyswim. For many employers they don't even think to look for them and their policies are confined to a generic policy on gender recognition (if that) which doesn't tend to cover practicalities and raising awareness.


We bought into the Stonewall Index thing a while ago and now that it includes Trans elements I don't doubt that my company will start to improve. I'm also likely to stand election for chair of the LGBT+ network this autumn and if I win I'll make trans awareness for the company a top priority!


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> We bought into the Stonewall Index thing a while ago and now that it includes Trans elements I don't doubt that my company will start to improve. I'm also likely to stand election for chair of the LGBT+ network this autumn and if I win I'll make trans awareness for the company a top priority!


I was just looking at Stonewall's top 100 employers - really interesting to see which employers are there ... Mostly public sector, big banks and big law firms. Probably the basis of a thread in itself ...


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> I was just looking at Stonewall's top 100 employers - really interesting to see which employers are there ... Mostly public sector, big banks and big law firms. Probably the basis of a thread in itself ...


we were in there till last year. dropped out this year. Shows that there are serious issues with the way my company deals with LGBT+ in my opinion.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> we were in there till last year. dropped out this year. Shows that there are serious issues with the way my company deals with LGBT+ in my opinion.


It certainly sounds like it from your experiences - I'm amazed they got on the top 100 list in the first place.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> It certainly sounds like it from your experiences - I'm amazed they got on the top 100 list in the first place.


They bought into LGB equality bigtime a few years ago but - like almost everyone - decided to ignore Trans.

And as the criteria for points gets more difficult our management seem to be taking the position that they've done enough already and are blocking good practice now.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> They bought into LGB equality bigtime a few years ago but - like almost everyone - decided to ignore Trans.



It does seem to get ignored, doesn't it  Maybe your employer should collaborate with Stonewall to produce something specific to trans for Stonewall's employer's toolkit.


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> It does seem to get ignored, doesn't it  Maybe your employer should collaborate with Stonewall to produce something specific to trans for Stonewall's employer's toolkit.


someone has to make them - hopefully that person will be me after September!!


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> someone has to make them - hopefully that person will be me after September!!


Good luck! I bet you will, too


----------



## Sea Star (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> Good luck! I bet you will, too


Thanks!


----------



## emanymton (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> I was just looking at Stonewall's top 100 employers - really interesting to see which employers are there ... Mostly public sector, big banks and big law firms. Probably the basis of a thread in itself ...


And the army at number 46


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

emanymton said:


> And the army at number 46


Yes, I was surprised to see that one there too.


----------



## Mation (May 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Are you being deliberately obtuse? You said to pickman's that he couldn't make the judgement call regarding someone's colour of skin in defence of someone doing exactly that.


No, that doesn't follow. Telling someone they're white when they tell you they aren't is different to referring to a group by that term. The latter is ambiguous about whether it's meant to include only people who self-identify or not.


----------



## Mation (May 20, 2015)

ska invita said:


> ah of course - thats sad and makes me feel somewhat sorry for everyone involved (and being mocked)
> To me student politics is a place to find yourself and cut your teeth a little, in the relatively safe space and small scale of the campus - whatever the rights and wrongs of this this isn't something that should be covered in national newspapers and shared hundreds of thousands of times on the internet.


Yep. Everyone needs to work out how not to be a dick. Some people have a LOT more working out to do than others and it can't help that we now live in a world in which that can be done so publically, and so easily.


----------



## cantsin (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> she is encouraging hatred instead of change and understanding and she should be sacked off sharpish. it's offensive. you can talk about power structures and privilage all your like, but if my black neighbours on my street started talking like that to me or my family, i'd want them arrested, just like if hte whites on my street started talking like that about my black neighbours. just because she's a student and a diversity officer shouldn't make any difference.



you dont really think your 'black neighbours' saying 'kill all whites' would be the same as you saying 'kill all blacks do you' ? Do we really need to go though all this again ?

Just daft.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

So what are you saying? It's less wrong for them to say it? They two might not be the same but the two are equally morally repulsive.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

With something as important as racism, to be inconsistent really is "daft".


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

One could be seen as an expression of resistance against an oppressor (eat the rich, kill all tories, ACAB, etc etc).


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> One could be seen as an expression of resistance against an oppressor (eat the rich, kill all tories, ACAB, etc etc).


 I don't care what it could be, if you want to kill me because of my skin colour you're a cunt.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Not saying I approve btw, but the two statements carry different weight. Context innit.


----------



## dendrite (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> One could be seen as an expression of resistance against an oppressor (eat the rich, kill all tories, ACAB, etc etc).



The oppressive white babies?


----------



## rekil (May 20, 2015)

CNT36 said:


> *SilenceoftheSams*‏@SamAmbreen
> I bet all the people giving @RooftopJaxx a hard time right now are urban 75
> 
> 0 retweets0 favorites
> ...


No idea who that is or why anyone here would be giving them a hard time tbh.


----------



## Belushi (May 20, 2015)

If my neighbour said that to me I'd call the cops.


----------



## Belushi (May 20, 2015)

killer b said:


> One could be seen as an expression of resistance against an oppressor (eat the rich, kill all tories, ACAB, etc etc).



Except those things never happen, but whites have been attacked and indeed killed for no other reason but their race.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

copliker said:


> No idea who that is or why anyone here would be giving them a hard time tbh.
> 
> View attachment 71649



It's beef stirring isn't it because SA didn't have a great time here?


----------



## cantsin (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> I don't care what it could be, if you want to kill me because of my skin colour you're a cunt.



are you into mens rights activism as well by any chance ?


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

Belushi said:


> If my neighbour said that to me I'd call the cops.


So would I. But it isn't your neighbour saying it, it's some dickhead kid on twitter. It's rhetoric. Stupid self defeating rhetoric, but it isn't real. 

Anyway, I don't want to defend this cock. That she's a massive tool is self evident.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Firstly its not a label, its a descriptive term like straight or white. Secondly, it carries no guilt or accusation. One does not choose to be cis. One just is. I love many cis people. My boyfriend is white, cis and hetereosexual and I still love him very much! Thirdly, if you support trans people then please don't reject the word trans as refusal to use trans results in trans people being excluded. For example, a cis woman differentiating herself from trans women will use such pejorative terms as "real", "genetic", "born" or "normal". Cis helps us avoid all of that!


How is "born" pejorative?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> How is "born" pejorative?



_Born a woman_. Giving weight to the gender being from birth, suggestive of authority.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (May 20, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> paging dialectician



We generally identify (and are treated as being) middle eastern or asian.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

cantsin said:


> are you into mens rights activism as well by any chance ?


Pmsl.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> _Born a woman_. Giving weight to the gender being from birth, suggestive of authority.


I am born a woman though, and I'm still a woman.  That's just a statement of fact


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I am born a woman though, and I'm still a woman.  That's just a statement of fact



Yes it is. However if you were using that statement to diffientiate yourself from a trans* woman you could be using it to claim some kind of authority over them/excluding them.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I am born a woman though, and I'm still a woman.  That's just a statement of fact


The context of how some radfems use "born woman" is exclusionary to anyone that wasn't born a woman and so therefore isn't a real woman and therefore has to be excluded from real born women spaces etc (according to them).


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Yes it is. However if you were using that statement to diffientiate yourself from a trans* woman you could be using it to claim some kind of authority over them.


It does differentiate though.  What else is the difference?  I'm not sure how that claims authority.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> It does differentiate though.  What else is the difference?  I'm not sure how that claims authority.



Because if you accept that trans* women are women, differentiating, could be used to exclude them or suggestive that 'born women' somehow have more authority over what it's like to be a woman or that trans* women shouldn't be included in some circumstances for example.. Context important here. Saying I was born a woman isn't a contraversial statement on it's own obviously.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Because if you accept that trans* women are women, differentiating, could be used to exclude them or suggestive that 'born women' somehow have more authority over what it's like to be a woman or that trans* women shouldn't be included in some circumstances for example.. Context important here. Saying I was born a woman isn't a contraversial statement on it's own obviously.


I would have thought "born women" have more authority over what it is like to be a woman and transwomen have more authority over what it is like to be a transwoman.  I'm not familiar with all the politics though.


----------



## Belushi (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I would have thought "born women" have more authority over what it is like to be a woman and transwomen have more authority over what it is like to be a transwoman.  I'm not familiar with all the politics though.



Don't get sucked in to it!


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)




----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Don't get sucked in to it!


An argument about gender determinism v gender performativity is just what we need in the run up to tea


----------



## frogwoman (May 20, 2015)

Well done everyone. This is basically just some stupid personal spat now.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I would have thought "born women" have more authority over what it is like to be a woman and transwomen have more authority over what it is like to be a transwoman.  I'm not familiar with all the politics though.



I was just trying to explain my understanding of how 'born' could be used as a perjorative.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> Well done everyone. This is basically just some stupid personal spat now.



Between whom?


----------



## Blagsta (May 20, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Except those things never happen, but whites have been attacked and indeed killed for no other reason but their race.



I think there needs to be a differentiation between individual acts of racism and structural racism.


----------



## frogwoman (May 20, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Between whom?



Urban75 and twitter. 

Killer b you and thora are the pretty much only ones talking sense here. I cant be arse to look through 10/11 pages of twitter spats tho.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> An argument about gender determinism v gender performativity is just what we need in the run up to tea


it really is


----------



## equationgirl (May 20, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I don't know why she's put herself in the sentence though. Women in general cannot be sexist towards men, and people from ethnic minorities cannot be racist towards the predominant ethnic group. But, like probably a great many other things, she only seems to be interested in this stuff as it pertains to her personally.
> 
> Also, 'not racist' does not necessarily mean 'not an idiot'.


I have to disagree with you there. I have heard and stopped women from being sexist towards men. Sexism is after all discrimination on the basis of gender.


----------



## Belushi (May 20, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I think there needs to be a differentiation between individual acts of racism and structural racism.



Yes there does, but its not either/or.


----------



## Sirena (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I would have thought "born women" have more authority over what it is like to be a woman and transwomen have more authority over what it is like to be a transwoman.  I'm not familiar with all the politics though.


There has been a feminist objection to transsexuals going back to American feminist writers of the 1970s.  Germaine Greer joined her voice to theirs at one time, though I believe she has shifted position fairly recently.

In the American pagan community, this became a major storm last year when certain 'born women' were still fighting to exclude transsexuals from certain meetings.  The overwhelming majority of the pagan community were outraged at what they thought were antediluvian attitudes.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Surely there are some women-only spaces that aren't appropriate for transwomen?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Surely there are some women-only spaces that aren't appropriate for transwomen?


name a couple then


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> name a couple then


Women's refuges or rape crisis support groups.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Women's refuges or rape crisis support groups.


but why wouldn't these be appropriate for trans women who might have undergone dv or suffered rape?


----------



## dylanredefined (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> name a couple then



Birthing room


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> but why wouldn't these be appropriate for trans women who might have undergone dv or suffered rape?


Why wouldn't they be appropriate for men who might have undergone dv or suffered rape?


----------



## tufty79 (May 20, 2015)

dylanredefined said:


> Birthing room


Why? E2a: is that even a women only space by default? I don't mean the person giving birth, more the people around them...


----------



## cantsin (May 20, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Except those things never happen, but whites have been attacked and indeed killed for no other reason but their race.



cops have been killed for being cops, the rich have been killed for being rich ( + not just in Russia in 1917 ) ...just like whites are very occasionally killed for being white

to compare any of this to the genocide waged vs  those on the sharp end of western imperialism for 500 + years is feeble and ridiculous .

"if my black neighbour ever..."	FUCK OFF .


----------



## frogwoman (May 20, 2015)

I agree - they should be optional tho, rather than it being the default policy that trans women are kept out. Its very hard to find a solution to this and i dont think the more extreme people on both sides are really representative. I think theres also a lack of understanding/support for trans people facing that sort of crisis too, and if a womens refuge is the only place that can provide that i dont think the policy should just be to say no. There are some feminists who use these sort of concerns as a way to excuse very nasty views on trans people generally speaking.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> I think theres also a lack of understanding/support for trans people facing that sort of crisis too, and if a womens refuge is the only place that can provide that i dont think the policy should just be to say no.


Yes, I'm sure there is a lack of support (and indeed a lack of support for men who have experienced rape and DV) but I'm not sure asking women to give up some space is the way to address it.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

no you fuck off you little gimp.


----------



## cantsin (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> no you fuck off you little gimp.



great stuff.

clown.


----------



## Blagsta (May 20, 2015)

dylanredefined said:


> Birthing room



Not a woman only space


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Why wouldn't they be appropriate for men who might have undergone dv or suffered rape?


i thought the words 'women's refuge' might have given away the game in the one instance. and the rcg might also cater for men, you don't know.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

So i will send some of my black mates around to whisper in your ear that they are gonna kill all the whites and watch you shit yourself and larf.  Wanker.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> So i will send some of my black mates around to whisper in your ear that they are gonna kill all the whites and watch you shit yourself and larf.  Wanker.


what a charmer you are


----------



## J Ed (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> So i will send some of my black mates around to whisper in your ear that they are gonna kill all the whites and watch you shit yourself and larf.  Wanker.



Sounds like it might be a bit awkward to bring that up as a suggestion...


----------



## frogwoman (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Yes, I'm sure there is a lack of support (and indeed a lack of support for men who have experienced rape and DV) but I'm not sure asking women to give up some space is the way to address it.



I agree but these places should be better funded in general. If the whole place was expanded and womens services adequately funded, it need not be giving any space up.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i thought the words 'women's refuge' might have given away the game in the one instance. and the rcg might also cater for men, you don't know.


If the words "women's refuge" give it away then what are you asking about?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> I agree but these places should be better funded in general. If the whole place was expanded and womens services adequately funded, it need not be giving any space up.


That's certainly the ideal.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Yes, I'm sure there is a lack of support (and indeed a lack of support for men who have experienced rape and DV) but I'm not sure asking women to give up some space is the way to address it.


They wouldn't be giving up space. They'd be including trans women. It's an inclusion that doesn't do harm.


----------



## likesfish (May 20, 2015)

emanymton said:


> And the army at number 46



Tbf the forces take equality seriously these days.
 Nb most of the abuse aimed at the padre who marched on gay pride was about the fact he was fat and his uniform was a sack of shit. rather than he was gay.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> what a charmer you are


I don't rationalise racism though!!!


----------



## cantsin (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> So i will send some of my black mates around to whisper in your ear that they are gonna kill all the whites and watch you shit yourself and larf.  Wanker.



lolz, of course you will sunshine, you've got a Wall avatar, I'm already shitting myself.

ffs...

#AMF


----------



## frogwoman (May 20, 2015)

I agree there are valid concerns around it (el-ahrairah knows a bit more than me) and the fact this sort of stuff has been abused by people claiming to be transgender when they're not. However the idea that womens refuges even seperately catering to trans women being 'giving space up' seems like a bit of a 'race to the bottom' argument tbh.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> They wouldn't be giving up space. They'd be including trans women. It's an inclusion that doesn't do harm.


The point of having a women-only space for women who have experienced rape or DV is surely to create a sense of safety, and  think many women would find including transwomen or men, even if they had also experienced those issues, would impact on that.


----------



## equationgirl (May 20, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I guess in a way I wasn't the person they thought they knew - at that point I didn't even know myself until I transitioned. They only knew who I was pretending to be!
> 
> But my boss tried to stop me going on site and made me do more officey admin stuff which is just sexist bullshit!!!


That is just sexist shit. You'd think we'd be past that crap now, but no.
Sorry you didn't get more support at work too


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

I live in a largely black area and have experienced racism towards me and trust me if certain neighbours of mine were acting racist towards me it would be very, very intimidating so take your "years of western imperialism" and stick it!


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> I agree there are valid concerns around it (el-ahrairah knows a bit more than me) and the fact this sort of stuff has been abused by people claiming to be transgender when they're not. However the idea that womens refuges even seperately catering to trans women being 'giving space up' seems like a bit of a 'race to the bottom' argument tbh.


It's a race to the bottom, and also pretty insulting to trans women. It's a bit like the arguments against the burka because of blokes doing armed robberies wearing them innit.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> I agree there are valid concerns around it (el-ahrairah knows a bit more than me) and the fact this sort of stuff has been abused by people claiming to be transgender when they're not. However the idea that womens refuges even seperately catering to trans women being 'giving space up' seems like a bit of a 'race to the bottom' argument tbh.


Women's refuges catering separately would be creating additional space rather than giving space up.  I meant including men or transwomen in women's refuges would be taking women-only spaces from women.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Women's refuges catering separately would be creating additional space rather than giving space up.  I meant including men or transwomen in women's refuges would be taking women-only spaces from women.


Trans women *are* women.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> Trans women *are* women.


Depends how you choose to define women doesn't it?


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Depends how you choose to define women doesn't it?


How do *you* define women?


----------



## frogwoman (May 20, 2015)

As womens space and funding for rape crisis support (trans or not) is being slashed to fuck by budget cuts, how relevant is this to the real world? Surely the reason rape crisis centres are closing is due to capitalism?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

cesare said:


> How do *you* define women?


Female adults.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> If the words "women's refuge" give it away then what are you asking about?


are you saying trans women are in fact men?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Female adults.


and define female...


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> are you saying trans women are in fact men?


I'm saying transwomen are transwomen


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I'm saying transwomen are transwomen


but not women.


----------



## cesare (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I'm saying transwomen are transwomen



Do you think that trans women are women?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

Cantsin how about when my daughter goes to the local school which is 30 percent white. You think it's "not the same" if black kids tell her they are gonna kill her because she is white?????


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

I certainly think the experience of being a transwoman is different to the experience of being born a woman.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I certainly think the experience of being a transwoman is different to the experience of being born a woman.


the experience of being you is different to the experience of my mum.

but i would say that you're both women.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> the experience of being you is different to the experience of my mum.
> 
> but i would say that you're both women.


Maybe you're right, women have nothing in common and the term "woman" is in fact completely meaningless.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> Urban75 and twitter.
> 
> Killer b you and thora are the pretty much only ones talking sense here. I cant be arse to look through 10/11 pages of twitter spats tho.



TBH I didn't realise that it had evolved into a proper twitter spat. I have been out at work and not following the thread all day. Did think that tweet from SA was a bit wtf though, then I went and did important things


----------



## dendrite (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> Cantsin how about when my daughter goes to the local school which is 30 percent white. You think it's "not the same" if black kids tell her they are gonna kill her because she is white?????


 
Even with the appearance and actuality of being motivated by racial hatred, those particular death threats wouldn't be racist per se. We're petitioning the dictionary compilers to catch up with our helpful redefinition.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Maybe you're right, women have nothing in common and the term "woman" is in fact completely meaningless.


i'm not saying it is meaningless, i just think you're drawing a meaningless distinction. 

let me put it another way. some people are born deaf. other people become deaf for a range of reasons. would you say some were deaf and others weren't?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm not saying it is meaningless, i just think you're drawing a meaningless distinction.
> 
> let me put it another way. some people are born deaf. other people become deaf for a range of reasons. would you say some were deaf and others weren't?


No, I wouldn't.  How about if I start wearing hearing aids, does that mean I'm deaf?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> No, I wouldn't.  How about if I start wearing hearing aids, does that mean I'm deaf?


i don't think you've entirely grasped the concept of deaf.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think you've entirely grasped the concept of deaf.


I'm identifying as deaf.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> So i will send some of my black mates around to whisper in your ear that they are gonna kill all the whites and watch you shit yourself and larf.  Wanker.



Hopefully any friend of yours that happens to be Black would say in response to your request, What? GTF!


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I'm identifying as deaf.



are you going to cut your ears off, or find some way to permanently block your hearing?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I'm identifying as deaf.


leaving that example to one side, why don't you believe that trans women are not a subset of 'women', which is what you seem to be saying?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> are you going to cut your ears off, or find some way to permanently block your hearing?


some people do set out to become deaf so they can belong.


----------



## Nice one (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm not saying it is meaningless, i just think you're drawing a meaningless distinction.
> 
> let me put it another way. some people are born deaf. other people become deaf for a range of reasons. would you say some were deaf and others weren't?



Did you just draw a parallel between being a woman and having a physical disability?


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I'm identifying as deaf.



You're starting to sound a lot like me from a few years ago, before I grew up a bit and decided not to pass judgement on those whose lives I am fundamentally ill-equipped to understand.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 20, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Hopefully any friend of yours that happens to be Black would say in response to your request, What? GTF!


my point was that it doesn't matter about "history of imperialism" (like old numnuts was rattling on about) when someone is being racist toward you, especially if what they are saying is "kill all the whites"!!


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> are you going to cut your ears off, or find some way to permanently block your hearing?


Are you defining a woman as someone who has genitals that look like female genitals?  What about transwomen who haven't had surgery?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> You're starting to sound a lot like me from a few years ago, before I grew up a bit and decided not to pass judgement on those whose lives I am fundamentally ill-equipped to understand.


I'm not judging anyone.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

Nice one said:


> Did you just draw a parallel between being a woman and having a physical disability?



Someone else did it first, Pickmans is just torturing the analogy to death.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Nice one said:


> Did you just draw a parallel between being a woman and having a physical disability?


did i?


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Are you defining a woman as someone who has genitals that look like female genitals?  What about transwomen who haven't had surgery?



they live as women and are women, aren't they?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> leaving that example to one side, why don't you believe that trans women are not a subset of 'women', which is what you seem to be saying?


As I say, I haven't followed all the politics of this.  But the basic argument seems to be that anyone can be a woman if they want to be, right?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> they live as women and are women, aren't they?


What does "live as women" mean?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> As I say, I haven't followed all the politics of this.  But the basic argument seems to be that anyone can be a woman if they want to be, right?



As far as I can see, no, not at all.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I'm not judging anyone.



You seem to be implying that people who decide to identify as female should not be considered female. That's judging, you're saying a decision someone has made about their own life is wrong, or that there was no decision to make in the first place.


----------



## Nice one (May 20, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Someone else did it first, Pickmans is just torturing the analogy to death.


It's an ill judged one


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> What does "live as women" mean?



you tell me, you're the one defining who is allowed to be what gender


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

Nice one said:
			
		

> It's an ill judged one



I quite agree.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> You seem to be implying that people who decide to identify as female should not be considered female. That's judging, you're saying a decision someone has made about their own life is wrong, or that there was no decision to make in the first place.


There can be no disagreement then over the definition of woman?


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> There can be no disagreement then over the definition of woman?



are trans-men women?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> you tell me, you're the one defining who is allowed to be what gender


No, I just don't understand how the term "woman" is being used - what does living as a woman mean?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> As far as I can see, no, not at all.


Who can be a woman then?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Nice one said:


> It's an ill judged one


thank you for your input.


----------



## friedaweed (May 20, 2015)




----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> As I say, I haven't followed all the politics of this.  But the basic argument seems to be that anyone can be a woman if they want to be, right?


i'm not certain that 'want' or 'decide' is the right way to describe people's experiences of this, being a trans woman doesn't seem to be a lifestyle choice like being vegetarian or only wearing blue.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm not certain that 'want' or 'decide' is the right way to describe people's experiences of this, being a trans woman doesn't seem to be a lifestyle choice like being vegetarian or only wearing blue.


So what is a woman then?


----------



## dendrite (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm not certain that 'want' or 'decide' is the right way to describe people's experiences of this, being a trans woman doesn't seem to be a lifestyle choice like being vegetarian or only wearing blue.



'Want' could be a true description without being a full one. I guess some trans people have used it to describe their intentions.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> No, I just don't understand how the term "woman" is being used - what does living as a woman mean?



it can mean all kinds of things can't it, including identifying as a woman, presenting as a women according to societal norms, legally becoming a woman, describing yourself as a woman, having a women's body/endochrine system etc


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> There can be no disagreement then over the definition of woman?



You've got it backwards I think. Nobody gets to decide what the definition of 'man' or 'woman' is because those words were loaded with implication and cultural baggage long before we came along. But you can look at those two things as they are currently defined and see that the place you've been assigned in that dichotomy is not one you're comfortable with.

I hope that in the future we will have got rid of the idea of gender altogether, but until we're enlightened enough to do that we have to acknowledge that gender roles and gender sterotypes are very powerful things in the world we inhabit. IMO the more people who choose to reject the role they've been assigned and build their own identities instead, the quicker we will get to a point where we don't need any labels for anyone any more.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> it can mean all kinds of things can't it, including identifying as a woman, presenting as a women according to societal norms, legally becoming a woman, describing yourself as a woman, having a women's body/endochrine system etc


It seems it means everything and nothing - maybe we don't need feminism at all, women should just all identify as men.


----------



## dendrite (May 20, 2015)

Hopefully doctors don't get rid of the idea of gender alltogether.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> You've got it backwards I think. Nobody gets to decide what the definition of 'man' or 'woman' is because those words were loaded with implication and cultural baggage long before we came along. But you can look at those two things as they are currently defined and see that the place you've been assigned in that dichotomy is not one you're comfortable with.
> 
> I hope that in the future we will have got rid of the idea of gender altogether, but until we're enlightened enough to do that we have to acknowledge that gender roles and gender sterotypes are very powerful things in the world we inhabit. IMO the more people who choose to reject the role they've been assigned and build their own identities instead, the quicker we will get to a point where we don't need any labels for anyone any more.


Maybe in the future we will get rid of the idea of gender, but for now I still think being a woman is an actual real thing that has a massive impact on the lives of women and girls.  I can't agree that it is something that anyone can choose to be.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I hope that in the future we will have got rid of the idea of gender altogether, but until we're enlightened enough to do that we have to acknowledge that gender roles and gender sterotypes are very powerful things in the world we inhabit. IMO the more people who choose to reject the role they've been assigned and build their own identities instead the quicker we will get to a point where we don't need any labels for anyone any more.



It does strike me that the radfems have missed a trick and that the fracturing and challenges to conventional gender is probably the best route out of gender altogether - and that will involves arguments abot toilets, presentations and pronouns because they are the signifiers of gender.  it might just be a fad, but if the multitudes of gender the tumblr kids are adopting matures into something more coherent and eventually takes off then that could see the end of gender, in any kind of meaningful sense, within a few generations.  perhaps, or perhaps it is all just bollocks, young people are irritating, but sometimes they do get things right in ways you can't actually see if you're not immersed in it. it is astonishing how much social attitudes towards sexuality have changed in just a few decades for example.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Maybe in the future we will get rid of the idea of gender, but for now I still think being a woman is an actual real thing that has a massive impact on the lives of women and girls.  I can't agree that it is something that anyone can choose to be.



are trans-men women?


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

dendrite said:


> Hopefully doctors don't get rid of the idea of gender alltogether.



At a purely biological level it's called sex, not gender.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Maybe in the future we will get rid of the idea of gender, but for now I still think being a woman is an actual real thing that has a massive impact on the lives of women and girls.  I can't agree that it is something that anyone can choose to be.



also do you think people choose to be transsexual?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> It does strike me that the radfems have missed a trick and that the fracturing and challenges to conventional gender is probably the best route out of gender altogether - and that will involves arguments abot toilets, presentations and pronouns because they are the signifiers of gender.  it might just be a fad, but if the multitudes of gender the tumblr kids are adopting matures into something more coherent and eventually takes off then that could see the end of gender, in any kind of meaningful sense, within a few generations.  perhaps, or perhaps it is all just bollocks, young people are irritating, but sometimes they do get things right in ways you can't actually see if you're not immersed in it. it is astonishing how much social attitudes towards sexuality have changed in just a few decades for example.


Isn't talking about "living as a woman" as a defining feature of womanhood just reinforcing gender and stereotypical gender roles?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> also do you think people choose to be transsexual?


I have no idea what goes on inside other people's heads.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Isn't talking about "living as a woman" as a defining feature of womanhood just reinforcing gender and stereotypical gender roles?



Maybe, but people shouldn't have to spend their whole lives fighting against gender stereotpyes if they don't want to. Maybe it's less about reinforcing things and more about simply accepting them, it's not like gender roles would magically vanish if there were no trans people perpetuating them.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I have no idea what goes on inside other people's heads.



Hold that thought.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

It has been nice to have some men tell me what it means to be a woman though, so thanks for that


----------



## dendrite (May 20, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> At a purely biological level it's called sex, not gender.



Ok. I thought you'd have that definition. It's not the only currently accepted way of using the words though. Just a bit more popular than the nascent attempt to redefine on-white racism as being not racism.

I was/am using it in this sense sense, from the OED:
* Males or females viewed as a group; = sex n.1 1. Also: the property or fact of belonging to one of these groups.*
*Originally extended from the grammatical use at sense  1 (sometimes humorously), as also in Anglo-Norman and Old French. In the 20th cent., as sex came increasingly to mean sexual intercourse (see sex n.1 4b), gender began to replace it (in early use euphemistically) as the usual word for the biological grouping of males and females. It is now often merged with or coloured by sense  3b.*

Doubt you're interested in a discussion over who's got more authority to define words. ETA: I know what you mean and I don't think it's an alltogether unhelpful way to use the two words. But it's by no means exclusive one.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> It has been nice to have some men tell me what it means to be a woman though, so thanks for that



But you're the one telling other people that their identities and their experiences aren't valid.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

dendrite said:


> Doubt you're interested in a discussion over who's got more authority to define words.



I would suggest that the power to define words is a source of authority, rather than a privilege derived from it. A topic for another time though perhaps.


----------



## joustmaster (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Maybe in the future we will get rid of the idea of gender, but for now I still think being a woman is an actual real thing that has a massive impact on the lives of women and girls.  I can't agree that it is something that anyone can choose to be.


I don't think people are choosing to be trans, like its some sort of fashion decision.
They 'are' that gender. Its just they were born with the wrong chromosomes.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> It has been nice to have some men tell me what it means to be a woman though, so thanks for that



well perhaps you can explain what you think it means to be a woman, and also whether you consider that trans-men are women?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> well perhaps you can explain what you think it means to be a woman, and also whether you consider that trans-men are women?


Why?


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Why?



because this is a discussion board and that might help people understand your view that trans-women are not women, or at least be able to decide for themsleves if your position is consistent and coherent.  you don't have to though, up to you.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

I've already expressed my view that being a woman is an actual thing and I don't agree with the redefinition of woman as something anyone can be.  I don't have anything to add.


----------



## joustmaster (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I've already expressed my view that being a woman is an actual thing and I don't agree with the redefinition of woman as something anyone can be.  I don't have anything to add.


Do you understand that being a woman, and having certain physical parts, are different things?


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I've already expressed my view that being a woman is an actual thing and I don't agree with the redefinition of woman as something anyone can be.  I don't have anything to add.



but you still doggedly refuse to answer whether you think trans-men are really women which suggests that your position is neither coherent or consistent, because if you can't 'choose' to be a woman, then surely you can't choose not to be one either


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> but you still doggedly refuse to answer whether you think trans-men are really women which suggests that your position is neither coherent or consistent, because if you can't 'choose' to be a woman, then surely you can't choose not to be one either


I think transmen are transmen just as transwomen are transwomen.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

what some sort of weird thirdy thing that doesn't deserve the dignity the rest of us are entitled to?


----------



## 8den (May 20, 2015)

Not to divert from what appears to have the potential to be a truly epic urban bunfight, but is she paid or is she a student elected into the office of diversity officer?  

If its the later surely there's a mechanism to impeach or recall her?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> what some sort of weird thirdy thing that doesn't deserve the dignity the rest of us are entitled to?


Is being trans undignified?


----------



## 8den (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Is being trans undignified?


More to the point is he really saying certain people substandard and should have less rights than the rest of us?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

8den said:


> More to the point are you really saying certain people substandard and should have less rights than the rest of us?


What do you mean by less rights?


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Is being trans undignified?



not undignified, but if it means being excluded from both women only spaces and being at risk in male dominated spaces, when seeking support for dv, or in prisons etc then being trans is not just dangerous but also rendering people as some form of sub or no-gender which is not entitled to the same protections and social norms that the rest of the human population is ie a sub-human


----------



## dendrite (May 20, 2015)

8den said:


> More to the point are you really saying certain people substandard and should have less rights than the rest of us?



Smokedout was the one who just introduced (not saying he suggested it as true) that notion wasn't he?


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 20, 2015)

8den said:


> Not to divert from what appears to have the potential to be a truly epic urban bunfight, but is her paid or is she a student elected into the office of diversity officer?
> 
> If its the later surely there's a mechanism to impeach or recall her?



IIRC you get elected in your final year as a student and then you do the job as full-time paid work for the year after you graduate.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> not undignified, but if it means being excluded from both women only spaces and being at risk in male dominated spaces, when seeking support for dv, or in prisons etc then being trans is not just dangerous but also rendering people as some form of sub or no-gender which is not entitled to the same protections and social norms that the rest of us are


Isn't it important to establish space/support for people who are trans then, rather than force women's spaces to include transpeople?  Or even to ensure male-dominated spaces are safe?


----------



## 8den (May 20, 2015)

dendrite said:


> Smokedout was the one who just introduced (not saying he suggested it as true) that notion wasn't he?


This. I edited to post to reflect it Thora. I was referring to smokedout not trying to suggest you thought that. Apologises for confusion.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Isn't it important to establish space/support for people who are trans then, rather than force women's spaces to include transpeople?



what like some kind of apartheid system for the gender-freaks or do trans-men and trans-women get their own separate spaces each?



> Or even to ensure male-dominated spaces are safe?



well if that could be done the discussion becomes largely irrelevent, the question is what should happen in the here and now


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> what like some kind of apartheid system for the gender-freaks or do trans-men and trans-women get their own separate spaces each?


I don't know, what do they want?

Men redefining what it means to be a woman and then hassling women to accept transwomen into women only spaces, despite however unsafe it may make women feel, is starting to feel a lot like yet another expression of male power to me.


----------



## BigTom (May 20, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> IIRC you get elected in your final year as a student and then you do the job as full-time paid work for the year after you graduate.



There are paid (sabbatical officers) and unpaid (non-sabbatical officers) roles, occasionally people get elected in their 2nd year too. I dunno which roles are paid and which are unpaid and it may vary from student union to student union anyway.


----------



## 8den (May 20, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> IIRC you get elected in your final year as a student and then you do the job as full-time paid work for the year after you graduate.


Thats what I thought. So essentially she's a college employee. 

I know there have been similar issues with a student officer when I was in college (though this involved misappropriation of student funds)

Anyway this is moot her term will be up in a few weeks, she'll be gone before any meaningful sanctions can be imposed.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I don't know, what do they want?
> 
> Men redefining what it means to be a woman and then hassling women to accept transwomen into women only spaces, despite however unsafe it may make women feel, is starting to feel a lot like yet another expression of male power to me.



except they aren't men, even you acknowledged that


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> except they aren't men, even you acknowledged that


You are a man aren't you?


----------



## joustmaster (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> I don't know, what do they want?
> 
> *Men* redefining what it means to be a woman and then hassling women to accept transwomen into women only spaces, despite however unsafe it may make women feel, is starting to feel a lot like yet another expression of male power to me.


Men? Do you mean transwomen?


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

does that preclude me from having an opinion on this?


----------



## co-op (May 20, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> Do you understand that being a woman, and having certain physical parts, are different things?



"Being a woman" can mean either the social role or the biological physical reality of producing eggs/bearing young etc. Completely different things of course. Which do you mean here?


----------



## joustmaster (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> You are a man aren't you?


These aren't terms pushed out by cis-men. These are from women (trans and cis)


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> Men? Do you mean transwomen?


Men and those born male then.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> These aren't terms pushed out by cis-men. These are from women (trans and cis)


Aren't you a man too?  You and other men seem to have these views - redefining women and no more women-only spaces.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Men and those born male then.



what about trans-men who by and large also support full gender inclusion, is that an expression of male power?


----------



## joustmaster (May 20, 2015)

co-op said:


> "Being a woman" can mean either the social role or the biological physical reality of producing eggs/bearing young etc. Completely different things of course. Which do you mean here?


does it matter?
either can be independant of biology.


----------



## joustmaster (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Men and those born male then.


what about people who are born and it's not clear, biologically, what sex they are. How are they allowed to identify under your rules?


----------



## co-op (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> It does strike me that the radfems have missed a trick and that the fracturing and challenges to conventional gender is probably the best route out of gender altogether -.



"Radfems" is derogatory jargon for feminists who question certain claims made by certain trans activists. So by using it you are already dismissing a whole swathe of thinking about this topic by feminists. But even pretty basic familiarity with feminist theory would let you know that far from "missing a trick" here, a very wide spectrum of feminists argued for exactly the fracturing and challenging of conventional gender that you refer to.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Aren't you a man too?  You and other men seem to have these views - redefining women and no more women-only spaces.



lots of people, men and women have these views.  also if womanhood is redefined by including people who are trans then that in no way supports ending women only spaces, if just means supporting women only spaces being open to all women


----------



## joustmaster (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Aren't you a man too?  You and other men seem to have these views - redefining women and no more women-only spaces.


I am just putting across the view that my trans friends have explained to me. 
I'm cis-male and, although I have my opinions, they are formed from listening to women, trans and cis.


----------



## co-op (May 20, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> does it matter?
> either can be independant of biology.



Now you've confused me. How is the biological physical reproductive system of a woman "independent of biology"?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

8den said:


> Thats what I thought. So essentially she's a college employee.
> 
> I know there have been similar issues with a student officer when I was in college (though this involved misappropriation of student funds)
> 
> Anyway this is moot her term will be up in a few weeks, she'll be gone before any meaningful sanctions can be imposed.


no, she's not a college employee. she is one of the sabbatical officers who runs the su. and the no confidence procedure was detailed in the evening standard the other day. in addition you can stand to be a sabbatical officer at any point in your college career, and not just in your final one.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

co-op said:


> "Radfems" is derogatory jargon for feminists who question certain claims made by certain trans activists. So by using it you are already dismissing a whole swathe of thinking about this topic by feminists. But even pretty basic familiarity with feminist theory would let you know that far from "missing a trick" here, a very wide spectrum of feminists argued for exactly the fracturing and challenging of conventional gender that you refer to.



the people I'm talking about call themselves radfems, or radical feminists, by and large.  I'm aware that a lot of other feminists do not think the same way, perhaps trans-exclusionary radical feminist would have been more correct


----------



## joustmaster (May 20, 2015)

co-op said:


> Now you've confused me. How is the biological physical reproductive system of a woman "independent of biology"?


Some women are born without.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> lots of people, men and women have these views.  also if womanhood is redefined by including people who are trans then that in no way supports ending women only spaces, if just means supporting women only spaces being open to all women


Women only spaces also open to biological males?


----------



## co-op (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> lots of people, men and women have these views.  also if womanhood is redefined by including people who are trans then that in no way supports ending women only spaces, if *just means supporting women only spaces being open to all women*





This doesn't make sense. You're saying that women-only spaces will still exist, so long as women accept that men who want to be/'have become' women are allowed in. When the whole debate is about whether that now constitutes a women-only space.


----------



## co-op (May 20, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> Some women are born without.



Indeed, and there are intersex and other groups. But I think you're ducking the point here.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

So someone who is biologically male and appears to be male, should be welcomed into women only spaces if they identify as a woman


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

co-op said:


> This doesn't make sense. You're saying that women-only spaces will still exist, so long as women accept that men who want to be/'have become' women are allowed in. When the whole debate is about whether that now constitutes a women-only space.



well yes, if you accept trans-women as women, if thats what redefining womanhood means then women only spaces continue.  if these are spaces which actually contain men then you havent redefined womanhood.  the two positions are inconcistent, thats all I was pointing out.


----------



## co-op (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> the people I'm talking about call themselves radfems, or radical feminists, by and large.  I'm aware that a lot of other feminists do not think the same way, perhaps trans-exclusionary radical feminist would have been more correct



I'm not going to defend "TERFs" because again I think this is an unhelpful term since it encompasses a wide variety of opinions, some of them pretty weird. But the idea that women *must* accept that trans people are women seems really questionable to me.


----------



## co-op (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> well yes, if you accept trans-women as women, if thats what redefining womanhood means then women only spaces continue.  if these are spaces which actually contain men then you havent redefined womanhood.  the two positions are inconcistent, thats all I was pointing out.



And if you are demanding that men have the right to become women, how are you "fracturing and challenging" conventional gender roles? Why not say "men have the right to be whoever they want to be and so do women"?

Men who want to "be women" often appear to be desperately upholding conventional gender roles, merely altering their own individual placement within them.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

co-op said:


> I'm not going to defend "TERFs" because again I think this is an unhelpful term since it encompasses a wide variety of opinions, some of them pretty weird. But the idea that women *must* accept that trans people are women seems really questionable to me.



no-one has to accept anything, the question is should we, as society, grant the same rights to all people who live as and identify as and are a particular gender


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

co-op said:


> And if you are demanding that men have the right to become women, how are you "fracturing and challenging" conventional gender roles? Why not say "men have the right to be whoever they want to be and so do women"?



I said it was the tumblr kids doing that not me.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> no-one has to accept anything, the question is should we, as society, grant the same rights to all people who live as and identify as and are a particular gender


Surely that should include the rights of woman (born women) to have safe spaces away from people born men?


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> So someone who is biologically male and appears to be male, should be welcomed into women only spaces if they identify as a woman



I think some common sense should be applied and that if someones lives as a woman, presents as a woman and identifies as a woman then yes.  I'm not seeing crowds of cis-men queuing up to try and pretend to be trans to access women only spaces, if that starts presenting itself as a phenomena then perhaps things need to be rethought


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Surely that should include the rights of woman (born women) to have safe spaces away from people born men?



I think the point here is that trans-women are women who were born men but identify as women, so see no harm in also accessing those spaces.

But this is way out of my area of expertise here.


----------



## Sirena (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> So someone who is biologically male and appears to be male, should be welcomed into women only spaces if they identify as a woman


That's the big problem, I think, and one that needs sense on both sides because the transition path is a long one and can take many years until the hormones take effect and, perhaps, the surgery is completed.

But that sort of sense seems hard to come by, especially since the first gauntlet was thrown down by early feminists and continues to be thrown down again and again as decades pass.  So both sides take stances and reasonable compromise goes out of the window.

I know post-operative m/f transsexuals whom no-one would suspect as anything other than born women.  But I have known others at the start of their journey whose presence is very masculine.


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> I think some common sense should be applied and that if someones lives as a woman, presents as a woman and identifies as a woman then yes.  I'm not seeing crowds of cis-men queuing up to try and pretend to be trans to access women only spaces, if that starts presenting itself as a phenomena then perhaps things need to be rethought


You're going back to these stereotyped views of what it is to be a woman - what does "lives as a woman" and "presents as a woman" even mean?

Should there be someone on the door of women only spaces deciding if biological males look and behave feminine enough to get in?

Are the views of women (born women) completely irrelevant now


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Surely that should include the rights of woman (born women) to have safe spaces away from people born men?



even if that means trans-women have no safe spaces at all?  and how do you tell in many cases, genital groping, demanding to see birth certificates?


----------



## Thora (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> even if that means trans-women have no safe spaces at all?  and how do you tell in many cases, genital groping, demanding to see birth certificates?


Why can't transwomen create their own safe spaces?  Why is it falling to women?


----------



## Dowie (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Isn't it important to establish space/support for people who are trans then, rather than force women's spaces to include transpeople?  Or even to ensure male-dominated spaces are safe?



then you'd be treating transpeople differently, it isn't like they chose to be trans... they're women trapped in a mans body and struggle enough for acceptance - banning them from women only spaces because some other women have an issue with transwomen is a bit dubious. It is like saying that you realise they have to be accepted but since they're not proper women and some women are a bit funny about them then they really shouldn't be there - surely it is the other women who are the issue in that case.


----------



## joustmaster (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Why can't transwomen create their own safe spaces?  Why is it falling to women?


because transwomen are women.
its not a binary thing.


----------



## Dowie (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> Why can't transwomen create their own safe spaces?  Why is it falling to women?



because they are women too and would like to be accepted as women


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

Thora said:


> You're going back to these stereotyped views of what it is to be a woman - what does "lives as a woman" and "presents as a woman" even mean?



they are the signifiers of gender in the society we live in unfortunately, and yes it is difficult, hence the call for common sense.  



> Should there be someone on the door of women only spaces deciding if biological males look and behave feminine enough to get in?
> 
> Are the views of women (born women) completely irrelevant now



you seem to be assuming that all non-trans women share your view


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

In the context of this discussion I think it'd be easier if people actually say what they personally _don't_ perceive a woman to be and what in their view they believe the risk to be/why it would be _unsafe_ to welcome trans women into women only spaces?


----------



## dendrite (May 20, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> In the context of this discussion I think it'd be easier if people actually say _*what they personally don't perceive*_ a woman to be and what in their view they believe the risk to be/why it would be _unsafe_ to welcome trans women into women only spaces?



Are you proposing this as some sort of safe space for subjective impressions? We had an amnesty for unpopular opinions on my spurs forum and it worked ok.  Or are we going to lunge at each other's throats with razors if our perceptions turn out to be misperceptions?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 20, 2015)

dendrite said:


> Are you proposing this as some sort of safe space for subjective impressions? We had an amnesty for unpopular opinions on my spurs forum and it worked ok.  Or are we going to lunge at each other's throats with razors if our perceptions turn out to be misperceptions?



Good questions and pretty much why I suspect there is a reluctance to be emphatic about any of it. I do though think that without that clarity the conversation will continue to be a circular, ambiguous one.


----------



## 8den (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> does that preclude me from having an opinion on this?


When you label transgender people as "freaks". I started to consider your opinion on this matter worthless.


----------



## 8den (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> no, she's not a college employee. she is one of the sabbatical officers who runs the su. and the no confidence procedure was detailed in the evening standard the other day. in addition you can stand to be a sabbatical officer at any point in your college career, and not just in your final one.


Thank you for the clarification.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

8den said:


> When you  call transgender people "freaks" I began started considering your opinion on this matter worthless.



its pretty clear what I was implying was that enforced segregated spaces for trans-people suggests that that would mean society considered them freaks


----------



## 8den (May 20, 2015)

smokedout said:


> its pretty clear what I was implying was that enforced segregated spaces for trans-people suggests that that would mean society considered them freaks


Then why used such a loaded word like freaks to describe transgender people?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

dendrite said:


> Are you proposing this as some sort of safe space for subjective impressions? We had an amnesty for unpopular opinions on my spurs forum and it worked ok.  Or are we going to lunge at each other's throats with razors if our perceptions turn out to be misperceptions?


surely the most popular opinions on a spurs forum based, if we're being kind, on a misperception.


----------



## smokedout (May 20, 2015)

8den said:


> Then why used such a loaded word like freaks to describe transgender people?



because i think that enforced segregated spaces is a loaded idea and hoped that using a strong term would help depict that and what it meant about that view


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2015)

8den said:


> Then why used such a loaded word like freaks to describe transgender people?


can you understand plain english? go back and read the fucking post again.


----------



## snadge (May 20, 2015)

BTW, Thora is bangonthemoney and this thread has become hilarious.


----------



## campanula (May 20, 2015)

I find this whole identifying thing rather confusing - not least because people tend not to exist as isolates but as part of a social order where things such as identity are negotiable because there is the indentifier and the identifiee...and meaning is generally something negotiated dynamically, continually, contingently, between people who agree to a consensus...so I can see that the question of a  the idea of a transwoman accessing an accepted female-only space such as a refuge (and there is an element of special pleading here - this is not a meeting or a social club and has implications for all parties - the women in residence, who may or may not be traumatised by a perceived male presence...but also, I am loathe to claim gender solely on the principle of biology and can fully understand the need to be accepted as female for someone with an identity challenge...I seem to recall this being framed as essentialism in my college days and was generally regarded as unacceptable... but language itself is never neutral either so I feel most uncomfortable with some of the certainties which are thrown around by both sides of the debate...and hereby consider myself to be a bit simple and unwilling to be drawn into making sweeping statements of intent...but having worked at a women's refuge, I cannot claim to be completely secure in allowing this self-identity thing to be the sole determinant of right.


----------



## dendrite (May 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> surely the most popular opinions on a spurs forum based, if we're being kind, on a misperception.



I'm sensing the edge of a banter black hole here I want to avoid. The stakes in the amnesty thread were pretty low I suppose.

This is my attempt to escape circularity and ambiguity along the lines of Rutita1's suggestion we define what we perceive as _not_ a woman:
I guess that if I had a friendship with someone with classically 'fully' functioning male/female genitalia, and all the accompanying male/female sexed genotypes and phenotypes, who 'knew' that they are were a man/woman, I don't think I'd feel completely compelled to believe that they were the opposite gender just on their declaration.  I even think people might feasibly be mistaken about this. So to my mind a woman is not just defined by someone reporting they are one. It's something more. Hopefully something you could know about them via empathy and being confided in. But not something which has to be accepted as full reality as soon as the concept's communicated. Maybe i'm wrong. Still ambiguous.


----------



## killer b (May 20, 2015)

crikey.


----------



## likesfish (May 21, 2015)

Guess it depends on the type of woman only space the behavior of the transperson and the reason they want to go into the woman only space.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

Mation said:


> No, that doesn't follow. Telling someone they're white when they tell you they aren't is different to referring to a group by that term. The latter is ambiguous about whether it's meant to include only people who self-identify or not.



It isn't a group being referred to when it comes to the policing of such a policy, is it?


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

smokedout said:


> no-one has to accept anything, the question is should we, as society, grant the same rights to all people who live as and identify as and are a particular gender



I think you're talking about legal rights here - we were talking about women-only spaces earlier and that's a different thing. Should mtf trans demand access to all women only spaces? No imo they shouldn't; doing so seems obviously antagonistic.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Isn't talking about "living as a woman" as a defining feature of womanhood just reinforcing gender and stereotypical gender roles?



This is at the heart of what irks me the most about intersectionalism. I'm sure it makes some valid points but then starts aping what it attempts to oppose by making everything about the colour of a person's skin or gender or whatever setting the ground work for new hierarchies to form.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

smokedout said:


> what some sort of weird thirdy thing that doesn't deserve the dignity the rest of us are entitled to?



So why call them trans at all then?


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

smokedout said:


> I think some common sense should be applied and that if someones lives as a woman, presents as a woman and identifies as a woman then yes.



As Thora says - what does all this mean? What about women who like to dress in an "unfeminine" way and enjoy taking motorbikes apart, are they not women? A man who "presents as a woman" should be allowed to present any way they like - unless you are saying that women have to present in a certain way, a socially approved feminine way. This is why so much trans "theory" is so deeply reactionary imo.



smokedout said:


> I'm not seeing crowds of cis-men queuing up to try and pretend to be trans to access women only spaces, if that starts presenting itself as a phenomena then perhaps things need to be rethought



Should pre-op mtf trans should be allowed to use communal showers in women-only events? They may (probably will) meet your criterion of "someones lives as a woman, presents as a woman and identifies as a woman"


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

smokedout said:


> its pretty clear what I was implying was that enforced segregated spaces for trans-people suggests that that would mean society considered them freaks



No one has called for "enforced segregated spaces" for trans that I have seen. You apparently accept the idea of women-only spaces, the question is why shouldn't mtf or ftm trans people have their own spaces - if they want them? Why must they be shoe-horned into prevailing gender assignations? The fact that *some* mtf trans activists do want to be allowed into women-only spaces is down to their valorisation of the identity "being a woman" - which leads to utter nonsense like discussions of issues relating to menstruation etc, (i.e. consequences of being a person with female biology) being denounced as "exclusionary" to mtf trans people.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> I think you're talking about legal rights here - we were talking about women-only spaces earlier and that's a different thing. Should mtf trans demand access to all women only spaces? No imo they shouldn't; doing so seems obviously antagonistic.


should we as society consult the law books every time we encounter someone so we know what rights to grant them? shoyld what the law says on this area be considered a maximum irl - or a minimum?


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> because transwomen are women.
> its not a binary thing.



Ironically, by demanding that mtf trans people *must* be considered women and nothing else, it is you that is demanding a binary - there are "men" and there are "women" and nothing else.

The whole concept "cis" - if that means that an individual successfully conforms to a socially-approved gender role that coincides with their genitalia - is a binary-demanding concept when it is applied to a society like ours which has a very binary gender split; blue for boys, pink for girls.

I hate the term and certainly do not consider myself to be  cis. Speaking as a man approaching late middle age it is incredible the number of men I know (or have known in the case of the many dead ones) who in many ways conformed to a socially prescribed masculine gender role (that coincided with their male genitalia) and more-or-less destroyed their own lives in the process through alcohol, emotional atrophy, violence and isolation. Can these men really be called cis? Should we really be enforcing these roles? It seems to be clear that we should be unknitting both male and female social roles (something the despised "radfems" have argued for 40 years). Where trans people fit in to a new and far looser series of social gender identities will be up to them.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> Ironically, by demanding that mtf trans people *must* be considered women and nothing else, it is you that is demanding a binary - there are "men" and there are "women" and nothing else.


Yes, this exactly.  And also that being a woman boils down to looking/behaving in a feminine way.  I find the whole thing quite worrying and offensive having read the views on this thread, it feels like a massive step backwards.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

co-op these societal notions of gender do change over time and are not statick as can be seen by the fact pink not always considered a feminine colour nor indeed are the notions universal


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> then you'd be treating transpeople differently, it isn't like they chose to be trans... they're women trapped in a mans body and struggle enough for acceptance - banning them from women only spaces because some other women have an issue with transwomen is a bit dubious. It is like saying that you realise they have to be accepted but since they're not proper women and some women are a bit funny about them then they really shouldn't be there - surely it is the other women who are the issue in that case.


Again, what on earth does "women trapped in a man's body" mean?  What is it to be a woman?  How do you know that you feel like a woman if you've never been one?


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> co-op these societal notions of gender do change over time and are not statick as can be seen by the fact pink not always considered a feminine colour nor indeed are the notions universal


So how do you know you feel like a woman then?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> So how do you know you feel like a woman then?


i know *i* don't. but how do you know at least some trans women don't feel like you? do you think they're doing it for a laugh or some other frivolous reason?


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i know *i* don't. but how do you know at least some trans women don't feel like you? do you think they're doing it for a laugh or some other frivolous reason?


Feel like me about what?  Surely my feelings about "being a woman" come from being born female and a lifetime of being raised female.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Why can't everyone, male, female or otherwise, dress and behave however they want?  We should be moving away from these strict gender roles of man/woman - especially with them defined entirely on how you look and behave!  Women have struggled for years against this.


----------



## BigTom (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> This is at the heart of what irks me the most about intersectionalism. I'm sure it makes some valid points but then starts aping what it attempts to oppose by making everything about the colour of a person's skin or gender or whatever setting the ground work for new hierarchies to form.


Yep, and there are some good things about it. One of the strands of intersectional thought I really like is the idea that (eg) feminism's job won't be complete when patriarchy is ended, because black women will still be oppressed by racism; disabled women by disablism etc, so there will still be oppressed women and feminism still has a job to do.

 (intersectionalism came out of feminist academic theory and the above idea was a hot topic within feminism for a while iirc). 

In this idea what is produced is unity & solidarity, not division. In real life (well, Twitter/Facebook) I see it mostly used to divide and stop discussion/dismiss people's viewpoint.


----------



## spanglechick (May 21, 2015)

The trans phobia on this thread is incredibly depressing.   There are two transpeople I know of (and presumably more I don't) who are semi-regular urban posters... And to see the trans state being referred to as a choice...

Just for the record, if any of the trans women I know were in need of rape support, or DV spaces, I hope they'd have access to the same spaces I, as a cis woman would.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

In a world of jargon that sticks in my craw, I think 'binary' is the worst.

Killing it btw Thora. Loving your work


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Why can't everyone, male, female or otherwise, dress and behave however they want?  We should be moving away from these strict gender roles of man/woman - especially with them defined entirely on how you look and behave!  Women have struggled for years against this.


i didn't think i'd said anything about looks or behaviour. but i must be mistaken. cld you point out where so i can provide an appropriate edit?


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

spanglechick said:


> The trans phobia on this thread is incredibly depressing.   There are two transpeople I know of (and presumably more I don't) who are semi-regular urban posters... And to see the trans state being referred to as a choice...
> 
> Just for the record, if any of the trans women I know were in need of rape support, or DV spaces, I hope they'd have access to the same spaces I, as a cis woman would.


What a lazy way of attempting to shut down debate on an issue that has a massive impact on women.


----------



## dylanredefined (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Why can't everyone, male, female or otherwise, dress and behave however they want?  We should be moving away from these strict gender roles of man/woman - especially with them defined entirely on how you look and behave!  Women have struggled for years against this.



  Outside of some work places and formal occasions you can for the most part.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i didn't think i'd said anything about looks or behaviour. but i must be mistaken. cld you point out where so i can provide an appropriate edit?


So what is being a woman then, a feeling?  A feeling shared by all women?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> So what is being a woman then, a feeling?  A feeling shared by all women?


that's not answering my question but rather a lazy way to carry on.


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

spanglechick said:


> The trans phobia on this thread is incredibly depressing.   There are two transpeople I know of (and presumably more I don't) who are semi-regular urban posters... And to see the trans state being referred to as a choice....



I haven't seen any "trans phobia" on this thread nor have I seen the trans state referred to as a choice. Can you show where you think this has happened?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 21, 2015)

Here was a reasonable discussion that touched on the issues being so heatedly debated on this thread: http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...oncile-itself-with-transgender-issues.323069/


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Again, what on earth does "women trapped in a man's body" mean?  What is it to be a woman?  How do you know that you feel like a woman if you've never been one?



you could ask that regardless of born gender - how does *any* individual woman know that what she feels is what every other woman feels - why get so hung up on sexual organs. Sure a trans woman is going to miss out on periods and pregnancy but is also going to have a whole bunch of other challenges.

some people have issues with chromosomes, for some it is perhpas psychological but then again there may be some evidence it is physiological too.. bottom line is 'women trapped in a man's body' means exactly that.

women might seek segregation from men because there is a history of sexual violence and dominance of men towards women - as far as I'm aware there isn't a history of violence and sexual dominance of trans women towards women. Surely women objecting to trans women being in women only spaces are the ones who perhaps need to compromise as it is their position that would be based on irrational fear/prejudice... I realise this is a potential straw man but suppose a bunch of heterosexual men objected to gay men being in a male only space - I think it should be the people from the majority group with the lack of tolerance that need to change/compromise rather than the people from the minority group who are already oppressed enough.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Born women don't all feel the same, isn't that the point?  
It's always women who need to compromise...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Born women don't all feel the same, isn't that the point?
> It's always women who need to compromise...


and if we were talking about f2m trans it'd be men who needed to compromise. you do know no one always gets their own way in life, right?


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

(edit)Well yes any women trans or otherwise don't necessarily feel the same... so why exclude trans women on that basis

Though I had thought that transgender people had been around for long enough that the actual concept itself was generally accepted by medical professionals, psychologists etc.. wasn't still open to general skepticism. Then again perhaps that is just reflective of the issues trans people still face.


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> *why get so hung up on sexual organs*. Sure a trans woman is going to miss out on periods and pregnancy but is also going to have a whole bunch of other challenges.



Because a large part of feminist theory has been about the evolution of the female role as secondary and inferior and that has been informed by discussion about how men have sought to control womens' bodies and their reproductivity. This can't just be dismissed as "hang up about sexual organs" - any more than a trans persons desire to have their sexual organs altered can be dismissed as "hang up".

Secondly - massive parts of this issue are about how you are raised - as a woman or as man; and that's just a done deal by the time you are an adult.


----------



## Mation (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It isn't a group being referred to when it comes to the policing of such a policy, is it?


I don't know.


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 21, 2015)

dylanredefined said:


> Outside of some work places and formal occasions you can for the most part.



I doubt that, if I walk down the street in a tutu and wellies I'm getting nicked


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> Because a large part of feminist theory has been about the evolution of the female role as secondary and inferior and that has been informed by discussion about how men have sought to control womens' bodies and their reproductivity. This can't just be dismissed as "hang up about sexual organs" - any more than a trans persons desire to have their sexual organs altered can be dismissed as "hang up".



since when have women been secondary and inferior to trans women? Your point applies to *men* not trans women, as far as trans women are concerned the sexual organs are, or at lest should be, irrelevant. Women being treated as secondary and inferior has nothing to do with trans women, nor have trans women sought to control women's bodies or their reproductivity, so I think dismissing irrational fears of trans women as a hang up about sexual organs is fine in that context.

Unless you're saying you consider trans women to be men I don't see how those points you raise about men are in any way relevant.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

Is _dismissing a woman's fears as irrational_ really what you want to do here? Interesting.


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> since when have women been secondary and inferior to trans women? Your point applies to *men* not trans women, as far as trans women are concerned the sexual organs are, or at lest should be, irrelevant. Women being treated as secondary and inferior has nothing to do with trans women,
> nor have trans women sought to control women's bodies or their reproductivity, so I think dismissing irrational fears of trans women as a hang up about sexual organs is fine in that context.
> 
> Unless you're saying you consider trans women to be men I don't see how those points you raise about men are in any way relevant.



I thought it was obvious that I mean "inferior to men", apologies if that wasn't clear.

Do you see how being socialised as a man (as a mtf trans person is) - might mean behaving like a man? EG making demands on women, expecting women to "compromise" etc etc. Why do you think the equivalent controversy doesn't come about with ftm trans people and men?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 21, 2015)

Artaxerxes said:


> I doubt that, if I walk down the street in a tutu and wellies I'm getting nicked


Where?


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 21, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Where?



Well, perhaps not nicked, but certainly stared at and ostracised by my peers.

Don't get me started on work clothes, having to wear shirt and ties pisses me right off.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> I thought it was obvious that I mean "inferior to men", apologies if that wasn't clear.



it was clear - I just don't see how it is relevant as trans women are not men



> Do you see how being socialised as a man (as a mtf trans person is) - might mean behaving like a man? EG making demands on women, expecting women to "compromise" etc etc.



some women are 'tomboys' as kids, some trans women have known from an early age that they're the wrong gender

Accepting trans people has nothing to do with 'compromise' it is just accepting trans people... trying to portray them as lesser women because they were socialised as a man early in life or they may or may not still have different sexual organ isn't accepting them.

as for ftm trans people - there are less of them and I'm not sure there are many shelters for men, I'm sure they have had issues with things like changing rooms etc..


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> Is _dismissing a woman's fears as irrational_ really what you want to do here? Interesting.



I think anyone with hangups about trans people is being a bit irrational, I thought it was widely accepted that they are genuine and do exist... though it seems like some people even on here are still viewing it as more of a fad or lifestyle choice or question whether, in the male to female case, they're really 'women' because how could they possibly know what being a woman is like etc.. they may have been raised as men ergo they're lesser women and other women might want to exclude them.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Feel like me about what?  Surely my feelings about "being a woman" come from being born female and a lifetime of being raised female.


My feelings about "being a woman" come from being assigned female at birth (not controversial in my case as it wasn't a controversial decision) and being socialised as one throughout my life so far.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

Personally I'd say that the needs of trans* women and cis women are often different, and sometimes conflicting or competing. No amount of wishing things were different will make them so, and resolving that conflict isn't going to be done by dismissing the arguments of any opposed women as irrational or transphobic.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> Personally I'd say that the needs of trans* women and cis women are often different, and sometimes conflicting or competing. No amount of wishing things were different will make them so, and resolving that conflict isn't going to be done by dismissing the arguments of any opposed women as irrational or transphobic.



I think trans* people probably have additional needs especially during transition. But I don't know because I'm not trans*. It would be polite to ask though.


----------



## kabbes (May 21, 2015)

I agree with Thora and I agree with many of the posters arguing against Thora.  That's what makes it so hard.

Mostly, however, I agree with every single thing co-op has said on this subject.  

Seems to me that the layers of the onion start with the idea that it should be okay to reject your socially-imposed gender but ideally the next layer should be a rejection of the notion of socially-imposed gender at all.  Saying that you accept socialised gender and just want to reassign your position in respect of it is a fundamentally reactionary position that may provide you personally with a short-term solution of sorts but surely just ingrains the actual long-term problem?

None of which rejects the idea that a feeling of displacement against your socially-defined role is both genuine and enormously difficult.


----------



## smokedout (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> I hate the term and certainly do not consider myself to be  cis.



are you transsexual?


----------



## smokedout (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> No one has called for "enforced segregated spaces" for trans that I have seen. You apparently accept the idea of women-only spaces, the question is why shouldn't mtf or ftm trans people have their own spaces - if they want them? .



well they don't by and large do they.  and as a very small section of the population then a trans-women's refuge would probably not be viable except in very large cities like London.  so what you're actually asking trans women to do is near impossble, even if you believe that trans-women should be segregated when it comes to support services like hostels etc.  effectively your saying society will provide spaces for non-trans-women, but trans-women need to set up their own services and if they can't, or haven't done that tough shit.  

you also seem to share the view that no non-trans woman would want a woman in their spaces, which is clearly bollcks as many non-trans women are strong advocates for that, and it happens, all the time without incident, everytime someone trans uses a public toilet for example.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (May 21, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> does it matter?
> either *can be independant of biology*.



Do those who want to maintain some dependence on biology with regard to their identity, have a right to demand their own spaces, even if they do so while making no proscription over what others may choose to do? 

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## joustmaster (May 21, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Do those who want to maintain some dependence on biology with regard to their identity, have a right to demand their own spaces, even if they do so while making no proscription over what others may choose to do?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


People can pretty do much whatever they want. Its if they should.


----------



## smokedout (May 21, 2015)

to be clear about what is being supported, lets take the other example to Thora's trans-person who 'looks like a man'.  What if someone transitioned 30 years ago, has had full surgery, is unrecognisible in every way from what society perceive as a woman, is legally a woman, lives as a woman in daily life in terms of appearance, pronouns etc, that people think of as a woman and may not even know she was once trans

are you really saying that if she needs to access a womens hostel, or rape counselling she can't, she has to disclose her past to everyone and then gets excluded from services?  isn't that just plain bigotry?  or can someone explain why it would be so imortant to keep someone who is a woman, with a woman's body, out of women's spaces which in the here and now has the result of them being denied services for things they face such as domestic abuse, sexual abuse etc


----------



## Louis MacNeice (May 21, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> People can pretty do much whatever they want. Its if they should.



Ok should they be able to?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Sirena (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> Personally I'd say that the needs of trans* women and cis women are often different, and sometimes conflicting or competing. No amount of wishing things were different will make them so, and resolving that conflict isn't going to be done by dismissing the arguments of any opposed women as irrational or transphobic.


I think that's probably true but, despite the fact that recent legal/social attitude changes are supposed to make us more tolerant of each other, there will still be rocky areas.

Thora made the point that she is a born woman and Rutita took her (gently) to task by saying that that implies an 'authority' over non born women.  AuntiStella has only recently transitioned (if I remember these boards correctly) and has chosen to stay in her previous employment.  She has said she has experienced difficulties but that is only to be expected because of her situation. She will not get everything all at once, she will get bits and pieces and gradually those pieces will combine and then everything will be nice.  That's the way of life.

There's a nice philosophical line from 'The Second Sex' by Simone de Beauvoir (1973) which goes 'One is not born a woman, one becomes a woman'.  We are all born babies and then gradually we acquire the outward trappings of our sex -the social stuff - and the social stuff brings with it certain statuses and lack of them.

Those who take strong positions are wrong, I think.  

For a m/f transsexual (I mean someone on a life path to change their apparent sex as well as their gender - not anyone else on the spectrum) to expect perfection at the first step is unreasonable.  Their whole presence will probably still be that of a man because they will still look and sound quite manly.  As the years pass, the medication will take effect and things will become easier.  For them, womanhood is not a trophy they can claim at the first step, it is a journey with no end.

For a woman to draw a line at 'born women' is also unreasonable.  There are thousands of post-operative transsexuals in society that no-one knows about, even if they take their clothes off.  They are women, indistinguishable from 'born women'. The special clinic at Charing Cross Hospital opened nearly 50 years ago and has been treating maybe 100, maybe 200 patients a year.  That's possibly 10,000 from one hospital alone.  Male teenagers who went there in the early days are now little old ladies collecting their pensions! 

This is just a live-and-let-live argument.


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> it was clear - I just don't see how it is relevant as trans women are not men



It's relevant to many feminists because feminism appears as a response to the oppression of women by men, and much feminist theory identifies the locus of that oppression as being control over female reproduction and hence over womens' bodies in general. To dismiss this as having a "hang up about sexual organs" is trivialising a critical issue - it is imo equivalent to any non-trans person dismissing anyone who wishes to physically transition as "having a hang up about sexual organs".




Dowie said:


> some women are 'tomboys' as kids, some trans women have known from an early age that they're the wrong gender
> 
> Accepting trans people has nothing to do with 'compromise' it is just accepting trans people... trying to portray them as lesser women because they were socialised as a man early in life or they may or may not still have different sexual organ isn't accepting them.
> 
> as for ftm trans people - there are less of them and I'm not sure there are many shelters for men, I'm sure they have had issues with things like changing rooms etc..



I've not portrayed them as "lesser women" I've challenged the idea that mtf trans people have an automatic right to make demands of women. I've also questioned the ideology underlying some trans theory - it appears to me that it postulates a "correct" female way of living, based on current gender stereotyping, which is exactly what many women and ??all feminists? are attempting to overthrow. I do not find it surprising that many women find the experience of being lectured about what they should and shouldn't do by people who have been socialised as men, with all the accompanying problems of arrogance and expectations of female deference to them, problematic.

And of course there are many mtf trans people who completely get this. But it's interesting that ftm trans people simply don't seem to make equivalent demands on men - do you think this  might be related to the fact that they have been socialised as women?


----------



## joustmaster (May 21, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Ok should they be able to?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


I've no interest in one. If a Trans man wants to come to a male space I use, then he is welcome.


----------



## smokedout (May 21, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Seems to me that the layers of the onion start with the idea that it should be okay to reject your socially-imposed gender but ideally the next layer should be a rejection of the notion of socially-imposed gender at all.  Saying that you accept socialised gender and just want to reassign your position in respect of it is a fundamentally reactionary position that may provide you personally with a short-term solution of sorts but surely just ingrains the actual long-term problem?



so what are non-trans people doing to socially reject gender?  strikes me that people who are transgender, who are victims of rigidly socially imposed gender are now being blamed for that for not doing enough.  why can't they just live their lives, like everyone else does, why is the duty on them to reject gender completely when almost no-one else does?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

kabbes said:


> None of which rejects the idea that a feeling of displacement against your socially-defined role is both genuine and enormously difficult.


all roles are socially defined. ALL ROLES ARE SOCIALLY DEFINED. do you need that repeating?


----------



## Louis MacNeice (May 21, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> I've no interest in one. If a Trans man wants to come to a male space I use, then he is welcome.



You may not but what about other people who may; are you ok with people using their born biology, in certain circumstances as a crucial marker of identity?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## joustmaster (May 21, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> You may not but what about other people who may; are you ok with people using their born biology, in certain circumstances as a crucial marker of identity?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


Not really, no.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> Not really, no.


let's not get into a pissing contest


----------



## smokedout (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> And of course there are many mtf trans people who completely get this. But it's interesting that ftm trans people simply don't seem to make equivalent demands on men - do you think this  might be related to the fact that they have been socialised as women?



sorry but thats a daft thing to say, the only purpose to it seems to be to suggest that if trans-women fight for inclusion then this just proves they are men

most of the spaces in question, and the ones which generate the most controversy, are spaces for people who have been victims of male, gender based violence.  if you accept this is a problem with society then the two things are not comparable.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (May 21, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> Not really, no.



This is what I have difficulty with. You seem to be telling people that you know better than they do what it is for them to be a man or a woman. 

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> Cantsin how about when my daughter goes to the local school which is 30 percent white. You think it's "not the same" if black kids tell her they are gonna kill her because she is white?????



It's not about saying "kill *a* white person". It's not an issue about individuals. It's about someone making a declaration against a whole section of people.
And the context of the declaration *is* important, as has already been mentioned. Do your black neighbours or even the entirety of BME British people have the power to "kill all white people"? I doubt it. Does the state (which sees itself as white) have the power to "kill all black people"? It does.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's not an issue about individuals. It's about someone making a declaration against a whole section of people.


presumably this someone is indeed an individual. perhaps an individual with issues.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 21, 2015)

i get the power thing VP. but i stand by the statement that i would find it equally offensive if a black person on my street put up a sign saying "kill all whites" as to a white person putting up a sign saying "kill all blacks". the other poster was saying that a white person saying or expressing that is far far worse than a black person saying that. Not on my street, it wouldn't be. If it was a white PM saying it, or a UKIP leader, etc, then yes of course your argument stands. This idea that black people cannot be nastily racist is a damaging one to the anti-racist cause. I have been called a "white cunt" for not giving someone a fag. You think that holds less water than if i called some a black cunt for not giving me a fag?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> presumably this someone is indeed an individual. perhaps an individual with issues.


not as many as someone who posts 34 million posts a day, mostly one line, weird drivel


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> my point was that it doesn't matter about "history of imperialism" (like old numnuts was rattling on about) when someone is being racist toward you, especially if what they are saying is "kill all the whites"!!



History very much does matter, because it shows where the power lies.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> It's relevant to many feminists because feminism appears as a response to the oppression of women by *men*, and much feminist theory identifies the locus of that oppression as being control over female reproduction and hence over womens' bodies in general. To dismiss this as having a "hang up about sexual organs" is trivialising a critical issue - it is imo equivalent to any non-trans person dismissing anyone who wishes to physically transition as "having a hang up about sexual organs".e and expectations of female deference to them, problematic.



you're talking about men again! How is that relevant to trans women, where is the oppression of women by trans women?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> not as many as someone who posts 34 million posts a day, mostly one line, weird drivel


you do yourself no favours by describing your posts as weird drivel.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> I've not portrayed them as "lesser women" I've challenged the idea that mtf trans people have an automatic right to make demands of women.



But trans women are women? Demanding equality is a reasonable demand. Would you challenge the automatic right of gay men to make demands of straight men, suppose some straight men had hang ups about gay men being in 'their' space?



> And of course there are many mtf trans people who completely get this. But it's interesting that ftm trans people simply don't seem to make equivalent demands on men - do you think this  might be related to the fact that they have been socialised as women?



depends what you mean by the equivalent demands - are there male shelters? There may well be some issues with changing rooms - but with men being the dominant gender and things being set up for women who are suffering from various issues then trans women who are being oppressed may well want to make use of the facilities set up for women in general. Trans men on the other hand - I'm not sure they'd want to seek refuge amongst men who are the dominant gender and often the oppressors. It isn't really an equivalent scenario.


----------



## TopCat (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> Other trans people have told me that the use of toilets and exclusion (and/or fear of exclusion) is a particular issue, and it's reflected in my own experiences of people transitioning at work - it seems to bring out the worst in people.


I had the task of supporting a trans women at work and the attitudes of cod women and the loos were hard to overcome. I really tried to get them to be reasonable but in the end threatened to make all the loos accessible to all. They blanched at sharing the loos with hairy arsed geezers and shared the loo with the trans woman with no further issues.


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

smokedout said:


> so what are non-trans people doing to socially reject gender?  strikes me that people who are transgender, who are victims of rigidly socially imposed gender are now being blamed for that for not doing enough.  why can't they just live their lives, like everyone else does, why is the duty on them to reject gender completely when almost no-one else does?


 
No one's asked them to "reject gender completely when no one else does" - what is it with all the strawmen? They are being thrown out left right and centre by the trans lobby on this thread.

The idea that mtf trans people have a right to demand of other people (born women) that their (i.e. mtftps') particular conception of a "female gender" is the one that be the norm is just rubbish imo - particularly so when feminists have spent decades challenging this stuff. No is demanding anything of trans people accept that they permit this debate without the usual crap about "being transphobic" etc, the Godwins of the issue, already deployed by one poster one here who - when challenged by me on this - hasn't yet come back with an example of what they consider to be a transphobic post.


----------



## kabbes (May 21, 2015)

smokedout said:


> so what are non-trans people doing to socially reject gender?


Seriously?  Have you not seen all those books on feminism, for example?  Have you not seen how far we've come since the 1950s?  But blimey, there's still a long way to go.



> strikes me that people who are transgender, who are victims of rigidly socially imposed gender are now being blamed for that for not doing enough.  why can't they just live their lives, like everyone else does, why is the duty on them to reject gender completely when almost no-one else does?


Yes, I sympathise.  It's a tough position to be in.  I'm not convinced that endorsing the prevailing view of gender by reassigning your position with respect to it is going to do anything in the long run but ingrain it further, though, even though I can understand somebody taking that path.


----------



## TopCat (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> Me too, but I can totally understand why some might choose to go for exclusionary groups, especially as
> is what intersectionality (in theory) attempts to achieve. And you've already rejected intersectionality...


You can successfully ensure everyone gets the opportunity to contribute without resorting to intersectionalism as is practiced by divisive whiney fuckwits.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Seriously?  Have you not seen all those books on feminism, for example?  Have you not seen how far we've come since the 1950s?  But blimey, there's still a long way to go.


how's that rejecting gender?


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> But trans women are women?



Born as men, socialised as men, and on various points of a transition spectrum - they are obviously different or we wouldn't be having this debate. When ever you come back on this you answer the issue of the difference by baldly stating "there is no difference". That's not an answer.


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> co-op these societal notions of gender do change over time and are not statick as can be seen by the fact pink not always considered a feminine colour nor indeed are the notions universal



The fact that gender roles are societally defined seems to be missed a lot in this argument. I have immense problems with a man saying "I'm a woman just cos I say I am". It's highly individualist and ignores the fact that identity is also about relationships with other people and institutions. Having said that though, I also have problems with the way society defines gender roles; they are limiting and often destructive. Being Marxist here, I would say that gender roles get defined by society and the needs of capital, the needs of capital have changed and gender roles are changing (more accurately being re-negotiated) . There's a dialectic between the individual and the social which is being missed in this thread I think.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

Can't we all just get along?


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> Born as men, socialised as men, and on various points of a transition spectrum - they are obviously different or we wouldn't be having this debate. When ever you come back on this you answer the issue of the difference by baldly stating "there is no difference". That's not an answer.


Not all trans* people are born as men or women. There are other biological combinations.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Can't we all just get along?


no.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Can't we all just get along?


not as far as i am aware.


----------



## TopCat (May 21, 2015)

Straw


Thora said:


> Maybe you're right, women have nothing in common and the term "woman" is in fact completely meaningless.


 man


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> Born as men, socialised as men, and on various points of a transition spectrum - they are obviously different or we wouldn't be having this debate. When ever you come back on this you answer the issue of the difference by baldly stating "there is no difference". That's not an answer.



No I haven't - please quote my posts using the quote facility rather than making things up... I've not said there is no difference between trans women and cis women.*

I've pointed out several times that trans women are not men - they are women*! You keep trying to justify your position by referring to men and oppression carried out by men. Is there actual evidence of trans women oppressing women? If not then is it not a massive assumption to assume that because men have oppressed women and some/lots of trans women were born in male bodies (others have some medical issue or are born with some ambiguity) then that is relevant to trans women. If anything it is cis women who hold a position of power and privilege over trans women.

(*for the sake of clarity - both cis and trans women are women - stating that trans women are women too(not men) doesn't imply that there is no difference between them and cis women which you seem to be claiming I have said)


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

TopCat said:


> You can successfully ensure everyone gets the opportunity to contribute without resorting to intersectionalism as is practiced by divisive whiney fuckwits.


How do we get rid of the divisive whiney fuckwits?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> How do we get rid of the divisive whiney fuckwits?



Add it as a spoke on the power side of the wheel of oppression.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> How do we get rid of the divisive whiney fuckwits?


by getting rid of capitalism and building true communities. then all this identity political stuff will evaporate (or that's the theory anyway ?)


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

I was hoping for something involving lime-pits.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> I was hoping for something involving lime-pits.


not gonna happen.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> I was hoping for something involving lime-pits.



or just send them off to do the seasonal picking/winkle harvest/etc

its what the chairman would have done


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> or just send them off to do the seasonal picking/winkle harvest/etc
> 
> its what the chairman would have done


canals all round


----------



## BigMoaner (May 21, 2015)

start with a twit, end with genocide. classic urban.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> start with a twit, end with genocide. classic urban.


genocide?


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> No I haven't - please quote my posts using the quote facility rather than making things up... I've not said there is no difference between trans women and cis women.*
> 
> I've pointed out several times that trans women are not men - they are women*! You keep trying to justify your position by referring to men and oppression carried out by men. Is there actual evidence of trans women oppressing women? If not then is it not a massive assumption to assume that because men have oppressed women and some/lots of trans women were born in male bodies (others have some medical issue or are born with some ambiguity) then that is relevant to trans women. If anything it is cis women who hold a position of power and privilege over trans women.
> 
> (*for the sake of clarity - both cis and trans women are women - stating that trans women are women too(not men) doesn't imply that there is no difference between them and cis women which you seem to be claiming I have said)



Yes, but, for the purposes of 'women only spaces' some cis women do not consider trans women to be women; they consider them to be men.  So the issue of women's oppression by men remains central.  For the question to become an issue of cis women's oppression by trans women, those 'trans sceptic' cis women would have to accept your assertion that trans women are women.  But, however many times you've pointed it out, some cis women have the audacity to disagree with you about a how their own gender should be defined.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Women's refuges or rape crisis support groups.


and that's the attitude that left me with no support when i was raped.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Yes, I'm sure there is a lack of support (and indeed a lack of support for men who have experienced rape and DV) but I'm not sure asking women to give up some space is the way to address it.


Giving up what space? I'm a woman and I should be allowed in women's spaces.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Yes, but, for the purposes of 'women only spaces' some cis women do not consider trans women to be women; they consider them to be men.  So the issue of women's oppression by men remains central.  For the question to become an issue of cis women's oppression by trans women, those 'trans sceptic' cis women would have to accept your assertion that trans women are women.  But, however many times you've pointed it out, some cis women have the audacity to disagree with you about a how their own gender should be defined.


How about trans women having the audacity to disagree about how our own gender should be defined? By us, not others!!


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> I agree - they should be optional tho, rather than it being the default policy that trans women are kept out. Its very hard to find a solution to this and i dont think the more extreme people on both sides are really representative. I think theres also a lack of understanding/support for trans people facing that sort of crisis too, and if a womens refuge is the only place that can provide that i dont think the policy should just be to say no. There are some feminists who use these sort of concerns as a way to excuse very nasty views on trans people generally speaking.


We're either women or we're not women. Any other approach is to say we are partial women which is demeaning, offensive and damaging!


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Why wouldn't they be appropriate for men who might have undergone dv or suffered rape?


You're intent on equating trans women with men. Trans women are women.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> How about trans women having the audacity to disagree about how our own gender should be defined? By us, not others!!



AS you can see how that works both ways; i.e. some cis women having the audacity to disagree about how their own gender should be defined? By them, not others!!

It would seem to be a fundamental challenge for identity politics, where Identity is self defined.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Louis MacNeice (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> We're either women or we're not women. Any other approach is to say we are partial women which is demeaning, offensive and damaging!



Or that there are many different ways of being men and and women that are not more or less mannish or womanish, just different.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Men are not usually subject to misogynist harassment or abuse and fetishisation by women hating bastards. Men are not usually targeted by misogynists. That is one reason why I am not a man. 

Also I have never identified as male and if anyone has the right to call themselves a "born woman" then I do as much as anyone else! To deny me my gender identity - which is not something I choose but something I've had to deal with since I was aged 4 - is prejudice and bigotry and should be called out as such!


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Or that there are many different ways of being men and and women that are not more or less mannish or womanish, just different.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


you've not said anything I disgree with - just reinforced my own points. so what other sort of women should be excluded? Should all trans women be excluded or are some trans women better than others? I think we need to know!


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> AS you can see how that works both ways; i.e. some cis women having the audacity to disagree about how their own gender should be defined? By them, not others!!
> 
> It would seem to be a fundamental challenge for identity politics, where Identity is self defined.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


that was my point. but the women who exlcude trans women seem intent on defining womanhood for all women not just for themselves.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> How about trans women having the audacity to disagree about how our own gender should be defined? By us, not others!!



Yeah, that too.  And that's the point at which the difficulty arises.  I don't think either point of view can be dismissed with a bold assertion, though (as seemed to be the case in the post I was responding to).


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Men are not usually subject to misogynist harassment or abuse and fetishisation by women hating bastards. Men are not usually targeted by misogynists. That is one reason why I am not a man.
> 
> Also I have never identified as male and if anyone has the right to call themselves a "born woman" then I do as much as anyone else! To deny me my gender identity - which is not something I choose but something I've had to deal with since I was aged 4 - is prejudice and bigotry and should be called out as such!



Experience of oppression and self identification are certainly two of a number of competing bases for defining gender, but who's to say they should trump others?


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Experience of oppression and self identification are certainly two of a number of competing bases for defining gender, but who's to say they should trump others?


I would say self identification was key, and experience is up there. Genitals, however, count for very little.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> that was my point. but the women who exlcude trans women seem intent on defining womanhood for all women not just for themselves.



Not really.  They aren't stopping trans women from using their own definition of womanhood, or from identifying themselves as women, but are simply saying that they don't identify trans women as women.  From which it follows that trans women won't be allowed to enter spaces in which the 'gatekeepers' conception of womanhood is a precondition.

I suppose it boils down to whether cis women have the right to define their own gender for the purposes of their own groups, and whether that should be trumped by trans women's right to insist that others identify them as they identify themselves, and to insist on entry to women only places on that basis, despite the negative consequences of that for some cis women.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Not really.  They aren't stopping trans women from using their own definition of womanhood, or from identifying themselves as women, but are simply saying that they don't identify trans women as women.  From which it follows that trans women won't be allowed to enter spaces in which the 'gatekeepers' conception of womanhood is a precondition.
> 
> I suppose it boils down to whether cis women have the right to define their own gender for the purposes of their own groups, and whether that should be trumped by trans women's right to insist that others identify them as they identify themselves, and to insist on entry to women only places on that basis, despite the negative consequences of that for some cis women.


Only a subset of cis women feel they have the right to define their own gender for the purposes of their own groups.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I would say self identification was key, and experience is up there. Genitals, however, count for very little.



For what it's worth, I'd be inclined to agree with you.  But I have to accept that, as a man, it's not up to me.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Yeah, that too.  And that's the point at which the difficulty arises.  I don't think either point of view can be dismissed with a bold assertion, though (as seemed to be the case in the post I was responding to).


How does me asserting my womanhood interfere with their self identification as women in any way at all? Why should I be excluded by a minority of women who have a theoretical basis for womanhood that is unsupported by and in conflict with all the evidence?


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> For what it's worth, I'd be inclined to agree with you.  But I have to accept that, as a man, it's not up to me.


it isn't is it?


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> Only a subset of cis women feel they have the right to define their own gender for the purposes of their own groups.



Fair point.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> it isn't is it?



No.  And I'm  not seeking to, am I?


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Not really.  They aren't stopping trans women from using their own definition of womanhood, or from identifying themselves as women, but are simply saying that they don't identify trans women as women.  From which it follows that trans women won't be allowed to enter spaces in which the 'gatekeepers' conception of womanhood is a precondition.
> 
> I suppose it boils down to whether cis women have the right to define their own gender for the purposes of their own groups, and whether that should be trumped by trans women's right to insist that others identify them as they identify themselves, and to insist on entry to women only places on that basis, despite the negative consequences of that for some cis women.


They lobby to have trans women excluded from women's spaces, and to have pro trans support and legislation removed. They are actively harming us. So no - you're wrong! They are imposing their model of womanhood on all of us. 

After my name was mentioned in the New Statesman earlier this year in the context of rape culture I was subject to a campaign of abuse from people, men and women, who hated trans women.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> No.  And I'm  not seeking to, am I?


don't know - you seem to be trying to change my view point on this


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> How does me asserting my womanhood interfere with their self identification as women in any way at all? Why should I be excluded by a minority of women who have a theoretical basis for womanhood that is unsupported by evidence and in conflict with all the evidence?



Some cis women feel that you asserting your womanhood by entering women only spaces interferes with their right to the security of women only spaces, as they conceive them.

As for the second part, I'm not saying you should (or shouldn't) be excluded.  As I've already said, it's not up to me - I'm a man.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Some cis women feel that you asserting your womanhood by entering women only spaces interferes with their right to the security of women only spaces, as they conceive them.



So they need to prove that this is the case. the onus is on them! Given that there is no evidence that backs them up they embark on campaigns of intimidation and abuse instead.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Yes, but, for the purposes of 'women only spaces' some cis women do not consider trans women to be women; they consider them to be men.  So the issue of women's oppression by men remains central.



Not really - for example someone can consider homosexuality not to exist/to be a lifestyle choice, it doesn't make it so. Fact is there have been genetic traits* and certain brain structures** linked to transsexualism - it isn't just someone choosing to be a different gender to the body they were born in... not to mention people who are born with both sexual organs or with some level of ambiguity or with issues with chromosomes...

And the issue of women's oppression by men really shouldn't come into it - if you can show that there is an issue of oppression of cis women by trans women then maybe there is something to consider - however unless that is the case then this is just a dubious assumption that because men oppress then trans women are somehow more likely to too. That really doesn't appear to be the case - there isn't much to suggest that someone who genuinely believes they are female, that all their life they've considered themselves to be in the wrong body... is going to share a bunch of traits with cis men. It just seems like a lazy argument - but they were born as men and might have been raised as men ergo the because men oppress women then.... OK if that is the case where is the evidence of trans women oppressing cis women? 


*http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3402034 *"A significant association was identified between transsexualism and the AR allele, with transsexuals having longer AR repeat lengths than non-transsexual male control subjects"*
**http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v378/n6552/abs/378068a0.html "*Our study is the first to show a female brain structure in genetically male transsexuals and supports the hypothesis that gender identity develops as a result of an interaction between the developing brain and sex hormones5,6.*"


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> don't know - you seem to be trying to change my view point on this



No.  But I think it's a fascinating issue, that is worthy of discussing.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> No.  But I think it's a fascinating issue, that is worthy of discussing.


You don't think I might be sick of discussing this by now?


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> So they need to prove that this is the case. the onus is on them! Given that there is no evidence that backs them up they embark on campaigns of intimidation and abuse instead.



The issue issue isn't whether trans women oppress cis women.  If we accept that men oppress women (which I think we all can), the issue becomes whether or not trans women are women or men.  Trans sceptic/phobic people use one basis for defining womanhood; pro trans people use another.  The difficulty is when those two viewpoints cannot be reconciled - who's view should prevail, then?


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

the one with the evidence to back it up


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> You don't think I might be sick of discussing this by now?



Fair enough.  I think I'll avoid getting too embroiled, too.  Not least of all because I find it hard to reconcile my own feelings on this.  And because it's not my place to say, anyway!


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> The issue issue isn't whether trans women oppress cis women.  If we accept that men oppress women (which I think we all can), the issue becomes whether or not trans women are women or men.  Trans sceptic/phobic people use one basis for defining womanhood; pro trans people use another.  The difficulty is when those two viewpoints cannot be reconciled - who's view should prevail, then?


Looks like majority view is prevailing - which is also the evidenced view. I've been to women only meetings and been welcomed with open arms. The transphobes are gradually being consigned to history. In the meantime a few powerful transphobes are using their influence to do as much harm to us as possible.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Fair enough.  I think I'll avoid getting too embroiled, too.  Not least of all because I find it hard to reconcile my own feelings on this.  And because it's not my place to say, anyway!


you could step up as a trans ally - if sitting on the fence eventually becomes too uncomfortable for you


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> The issue issue isn't whether trans women oppress cis women.  If we accept that men oppress women (which I think we all can), the issue becomes whether or not trans women are women or men.



Respect my self identity - don't debate it!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> you could step up as a trans ally - if sitting on the fence eventually becomes too uncomfortable for you


he could be a trans ally instead of becoming an aunt sally


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

I'm not sure if your cause is aided by men telling women how womenhood should be defined, tbf.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> the one with the evidence to back it up



I don't buy the idea that there is biological evidence that proves gender, given it's a multifaceted (and socially constructed) thing.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> I'm not sure if your cause is aided by men telling women how womenhood should be defined, tbf.


my cause?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> I don't buy the idea that there is biological evidence that proves gender, given it's a multifaceted (and socially constructed) thing.


but i would hope you agree evidence from biology, not to mention anatomy, can certainly be in many cases suggestive.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> I don't buy the idea that there is biological evidence that proves gender, given it's a multifaceted (and socially constructed) thing.



well there is growing evidence whether you like it or not - examples posted in my previous post... genes, brain structures... frankly there is likely to be more found as research into this area progresses - that isn't to say that it isn't multifaceted but there do seem to be some biological traits at least related to or commonly found in transsexualism, ergo the trans skeptic position is a bit dubious


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> but i would hope you agree evidence from biology, not to mention anatomy, can certainly be in many cases suggestive.


 
Not in the case of gender, which is not a matter of biology.  Haven't you read Butler ffs?


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> well there is growing evidence whether you like it or not - examples posted in my previous post... genes, brain structures... frankly there is likely to be more found as research into this area progresses - that isn't to say that it isn't multifaceted but there do seem to be some biological traits behind transsexualism, ergo the trans skeptic position is a bit dubious



That's only evidence if you accept that gender is defined on the basis of biology.  Many don't.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> Not in the case of gender, which is not a matter of biology.  Haven't you read Butler ffs?


Despite what any of us may feel about socially constructed roles, the gender that most of us are assigned from birth derives from medics declaring a baby to be girl or boy at birth based on a swift visual look at the baby's genitals.


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> Despite what any of us may feel about socially constructed roles, the gender that most of us are assigned from birth derives from medics declaring a baby to be girl or boy at birth based on a swift visual look at the baby's genitals.


 
That's sex, not gender.


----------



## Idris2002 (May 21, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> That's sex, not gender.



No, it's a gender assignation based on assumptions about sex.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> That's only evidence if you accept that gender is defined on the basis of biology.  Many don't.



not solely, but the point was that it throws the trans skeptic position into doubt


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Respect my self identity - don't debate it!



I respect your freedom to identify yourself how ever you want.

I have more of an issue where the expression of that identity clashes with some other women's rights to associate with whomever they choose, based on their own conception of identity.

There's a tension there.  But not one that it's my place to resolve.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> That's sex, not gender.


The sex that the medics identify at birth mostly assigns the gender that the baby's subsequent life is constructed around.


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> No, it's a gender assignation based on assumptions about sex.


 
No it isn't.  Sex is biological; gender is cultural.  The doctor is only concerned with the former.


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> The sex that the medics identify at birth mostly assigns the gender that the baby's subsequent life is constructed around.


 
Until about 1970, sure.  Not so much these days.  Less still in the immediate future.  Not at all in the foreseeable future.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 21, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> No it isn't.  Sex is biological; gender is cultural.  The doctor is only concerned with the former.


You have missed the point cesare and idris are making entirely.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> not solely, but the point was that it throws the trans skeptic position into doubt



It's not a matter of 'doubt' about what is true/untrue.  It's about what is/is not, predicated on differing bases of conception.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> Despite what any of us may feel about socially constructed roles, the gender that most of us are assigned from birth derives from medics declaring a baby to be girl or boy at birth based on a swift visual look at the baby's genitals.


yeh and any self-constructed or -realised gender which arises later arises DESPITE years of (as it turns out) frequently inappropriate socialisation: you read about people who realised they were in the wrong body at an early age, before the time when those in the right body start thinking much about sex. or gender.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh and any self-constructed or -realised gender which arises later arises DESPITE years of (as it turns out) frequently inappropriate socialisation: you read about people who realised they were in the wrong body at an early age, before the time when those in the right body start thinking much about sex. or gender.



and of course examples like this:

http://documentarystorm.com/dr-money-and-the-boy-with-no-penis/

where the assumption that someone could just undergo surgery and be raised as a female would be fine...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh and any self-constructed or -realised gender which arises later arises DESPITE years of (as it turns out) frequently inappropriate socialisation: you read about people who realised they were in the wrong body at an early age, before the time when those in the right body start thinking much about sex. or gender.


Yeah, there have been moments on this thread when I have felt people downplaying this, framing it as some kind of lifestyle choice to be trans that somehow diminishes the concept gender.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> It's not a matter of 'doubt' about what is true/untrue.  It's about what is/is not, predicated on differing bases of conception.



I don't see why it isn't - some people are trans skeptic and want to frame it as a choice or as men having a thing for dressing as women etc..  the fact there are biological traits associated with it and a lot of evidence from psychologists that trans people genuinely feel they are of a particular gender then a trans skeptic position is silly, untrue and is thrown into doubt. Not to mention that the position is rather damaging to trans people who want to be treated fairly. Frankly the positions are  not equal, nor just simply matters of opinion - the trans skeptic position is the weak one that goes against the evidence.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> Not in the case of gender, which is not a matter of biology.  Haven't you read Butler ffs?


let me put it this way, for the hard of thinking. if trans women have brain activity patterns which are similar to those of 'born women' then it would be reasonable to assume there is some commonality.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> I don't see why it isn't - some people are trans skeptic and want to frame it as a choice or as men having a thing for dressing as women etc..  the fact there are biological traits associated with it and a lot of evidence from psychologists that trans people genuinely feel they are of a particular gender then a trans skeptic position is silly, untrue and is thrown into doubt. Not to mention that the position is rather damaging to trans people who want to be treated fairly. Frankly the positions are  not equal, nor just simply matters of opinion - the trans skeptic position is the weak one that goes against the evidence.



You keep missing the point.  Biological evidence that defines gender is only evidence if gender is defined biologically.  There are other bases for defining gender, most of which are considerably more nuanced than the idea that trans women are simply men who have a thing as dressing as women.


----------



## Idris2002 (May 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You have missed the point cesare and idris are making entirely.


He knows fine well what our point is.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, there have been moments on this thread when I have felt people downplaying this, framing it as some kind of lifestyle choice to be trans that somehow diminishes the concept gender.



Actually, diminishing the concept of gender (in the sense of moving beyond it) seems to me the only way to resolve the impasse of competing rights.

And the only way to resolve the dichotomy that trans women are both the victims of societally created gender stereotypes, and are complicit in perpetuating them.

A first step would be considering how the concept of gender has arisen, and what purpose/interests it serves.

As ever, I suspect the answer will be it has arisen to serve capital, in turn suggesting the solution is to move beyond that mode of production.  And indicating once again the importance of class struggle overarching intersectionalist squabbles.


----------



## 8ball (May 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, there have been moments on this thread when I have felt people downplaying this, framing it as some kind of lifestyle choice to be trans that somehow diminishes the concept gender.


 
I think it needs to be seen as something that manifests _within_ the existing conception of gender or it doesn't make any sense at all. It takes an understanding of cultural gender roles, their proposed immutable linkage to biological sex, as well as an understanding of dualism before you can perceive yourself to be in the 'wrong body'.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> Actually, diminishing the concept of gender seems to me the only way to be able to resolve the impasse of competing rights.  And to resolve the dichotomy that trans women are both the victims of societally created gender stereotypes, and are complicit in perpetuating them.


Alternatively (and to paraphrase Butler) accepting that gender is something that you do, rather than what you are, seems to me to be a way to start to resolve the dichotomy.


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> well there is growing evidence whether you like it or not - examples posted in my previous post... genes, brain structures... frankly there is likely to be more found as research into this area progresses - that isn't to say that it isn't multifaceted but there do seem to be some biological traits at least related to or commonly found in transsexualism, ergo the trans skeptic position is a bit dubious



The idea that brain structures determine behaviour is quite outdated. Behaviour can change brain structures. It's the relationship between the two that's important. Dialectical, if you like.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> You keep missing the point.  Biological evidence that defines gender is only evidence if gender is defined biologically.  There are other bases for defining gender, most of which are considerably more nuanced than the idea that trans women are simply men who have a thing as dressing as women.



sure there are, I'm not missing that it is multifaceted but I am pointing out that the trans skeptic position is dubious - if you want to dismiss biological evidence and define gender only in terms of some other criteria and then dismiss evidence from psychologists etc.. then... well whatever definition of gender you end up with that excludes trans people would seem to have no actual basis in reality and is mere opinion/mental masturbation


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> The idea that brain structures determine behaviour is quite outdated. Behaviour can change brain structures. It's the relationship between the two that's important. Dialectical, if you like.



I'm not sure there is a claim that one determines the other rather just evidence of a link... either way my point was just that there seems to be evidence that there is more to this than just a lifestyle choice, genetic evidence too not just brain structures


----------



## likesfish (May 21, 2015)

Look like behave like a woman  woman
 Look like behave like a man man

Their maybe people who fall in the middle shouldnt really be too much of an issue


----------



## Belushi (May 21, 2015)

I'm finding this a fascinating discussion, making me think about issues I haven't really thought a lot about :thumbs :


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> I'm not sure there is a claim that one determines the other rather just evidence of a link



Yes, there are links. They are not one way, as you appeared to be suggesting. It's not about one determining the other, rather it's a dynamic relationship. Considering brains as isolated from social context tells us very little.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Look like behave like a woman  woman
> Look like behave like a man man
> 
> Their maybe people who fall in the middle shouldnt really be too much of an issue


That's that sorted out then. Finally!


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> Not all trans* people are born as men or women. There are other biological combinations.



Yes, as I've acknowledged upthread. Why do you feel the need to point this out to me, and not to trans lobbyists who also have ignored the (numerically tiny) other groups?


----------



## 8ball (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> I'm not sure there is a claim that one determines the other rather just evidence of a link... either way my point was just that there seems to be evidence that there is more to this than just a lifestyle choice, genetic evidence too not just brain structures


 
Genetic evidence?


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

8ball said:


> Genetic evidence?



Genetic evidence is never that clear cut either afaik, environment can alter gene expression.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> sure there are, I'm not missing that it is multifaceted but I am pointing out that the trans skeptic position is dubious - if you want to dismiss biological evidence and define gender only in terms of some other criteria and then dismiss evidence from psychologists etc.. then... well whatever definition of gender you end up with that excludes trans people would seem to have no actual basis in reality and is mere opinion/mental masturbation



I suspect that there's the potential for negative consequences attached to whichever conception of gender is preferred.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> Yes, as I've acknowledged upthread. Why do you feel the need to point this out to me, and not to *trans lobbyists who also have ignored the (numerically tiny) other groups?*





Dowie said:


> Not really - for example someone can consider homosexuality not to exist/to be a lifestyle choice, it doesn't make it so. Fact is there have been genetic traits* and certain brain structures** linked to transsexualism - it isn't just someone choosing to be a different gender to the body they were born in... *not to mention people who are born with both sexual organs or with some level of ambiguity or with issues with chromosomes...*



they've not been ignored - I've mentioned a couple of times over the past pages...


----------



## 8ball (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Genetic evidence is never that clear cut either afaik, environment can alter gene expression.


 
Hmmm... I very much doubt there is a significant pool of epigenetic data in this area.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

8ball said:


> Genetic evidence?



I linked to a couple of papers in the previous page - one re: genes and one re: brain structures



> *http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3402034 *"A significant association was identified between transsexualism and the AR allele, with transsexuals having longer AR repeat lengths than non-transsexual male control subjects"*
> **http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v378/n6552/abs/378068a0.html "*Our study is the first to show a female brain structure in genetically male transsexuals and supports the hypothesis that gender identity develops as a result of an interaction between the developing brain and sex hormones5,6.*"


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> I've pointed out several times that trans women are not men - they are women*! You keep trying to justify your position by referring to men and oppression carried out by men. Is there actual evidence of trans women oppressing women? If not then is it not a massive assumption to assume that because men have oppressed women and some/lots of trans women were born in male bodies (others have some medical issue or are born with some ambiguity) then that is relevant to trans women. If anything it is cis women who hold a position of power and privilege over trans women.



I am not "justifying my position by referring to men and oppression carried out by them". I was criticising your facile description of women who object to trans women in women only space as being "hung up about sexual organs". I was pointing out that those sexual organs have a significant place in feminist critiques of women's oppression, therefore this is not just some little "hang up". That place revolves around trying to understand why so many men have ended up oppressing women so insistently for so long that it has become a normal part of most human cultures (over recent centuries). You can't simply wipe this context away or trivialise it

Have you now accepted this? You keep ignoring it.

Would you accept a non-trans person describing a trans person's desire to transition as "just having a hang up about sexual organs"? That is equivalent trivialisation (I'd argue it might be less so) - another question you haven't answered.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> Yes, as I've acknowledged upthread. Why do you feel the need to point this out to me, and not to trans lobbyists who also have ignored the (numerically tiny) other groups?


I don't need to point it out to people that aren't trans exclusionary.


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> I linked to a couple of papers in the previous page - one re: genes and one re: brain structures



As I pointed out, that doesn't necessarily tell us very much


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> I don't need to point it out to people that aren't trans exclusionary.



Do you need to point it out even when I have acknowledged it and even though the debate is clearly not about these groups? What are you trying to establish?


----------



## 8ball (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> I linked to a couple of papers in the previous page - one re: genes and one re: brain structures


 
Cheers.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 21, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Look like behave like a woman  woman
> Look like behave like a man man
> 
> Their maybe people who fall in the middle shouldnt really be too much of an issue


intersex/third sex?


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> Do you need to point it out even when I have acknowledged it and even though the debate is clearly not about these groups? What are you trying to establish?


You gave a nod to it earlier in the thread, but then proceeded to decide that the debate wasn't about these groups. It is about these groups as well.


----------



## CNT36 (May 21, 2015)

copliker said:


> No idea who that is or why anyone here would be giving them a hard time tbh.
> 
> View attachment 71649


I looked but I am pretty shit at Twitter and couldn't see much going on especially considering the vileness people spout over shit like this. Also -



> *SilenceoftheSams* @SamAmbreen · 18h18 hours ago
> If it was possible to need more reason to #supportbaharmustafa then maybe this is it? http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/goldsmiths-university-diversity-officer-facing-sack.335058/…
> 
> 0 retweets0 favorites


And I think this means me for posting that dig of hers yesterday.


> *SilenceoftheSams* @SamAmbreen · 18h18 hours ago
> Of course I get a mention from my hate crush fanclub. Did I not say they stalk my TL? *buffs nails*


Assuming a TL is a twitter profile I'm not sure how I am stalking it. I rarely use twitter more than once a week and usually it is a monthly indulgence. I think yesterday I visited her after seeing she had posted on a hashtag. Maybe you're the stalker. Feel free to explain/comment Sam Ambreen


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> I am not "justifying my position by referring to men and oppression carried out by them". I was criticising your facile description of women who object to trans women in women only space as being "hung up about sexual organs". I was pointing out that those sexual organs have a significant place in feminist critiques of women's oppression, therefore this is not just some little "hang up". That place revolves around trying to understand why so many men have ended up oppressing women so insistently for so long that it has become a normal part of most human cultures (over recent centuries). You can't simply wipe this context away or trivialise it
> 
> Have you now accepted this? You keep ignoring it.



I've not ignored it, I've replied several times pointing out that transwomen aren't men.  Pointing out that transwomen were raised as men and were born as men then banging on about oppression of women by men really isn't relevant. Some transwomen still have male sexual organs, so what... are they OK then if they've had surgery?


----------



## TopCat (May 21, 2015)

Sam won't post here. It's not a safe space. People challenge stuff, use logic and that.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> Would you accept a non-trans person describing a trans person's desire to transition as "just having a hang up about sexual organs"? That is equivalent trivialisation (I'd argue it might be less so) - another question you haven't answered.



I wouldn't say that is the equivalent no. In that case someone is making a decision about their own body and how it conforms to their identity, in the other scenario someone else is making a judgement about another person's body that may not be relevant to that person's identity.


----------



## 8ball (May 21, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Sam won't post here. It's not a safe space. People challenge stuff, use logic and that.


 
"Safe space" seems to have a wide semantic range.


----------



## CNT36 (May 21, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Sam won't post here. It's not a safe space. People challenge stuff, use logic and that.


I probably wouldn't be to keen either to be fair especially after the banned users started calling her out on twitter.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> I've not ignored it, I've replied several times pointing out that transwomen aren't men.  Pointing out that transwomen were raised as men and were born as men then banging on about oppression of women by men really isn't relevant. Some transwomen still have male sexual organs, so what... are they OK then if they've had surgery?



You seem genuinely baffled that people haven't accepted your bold assertions notwithstanding that you've "pointed out" things "several times".


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

CNT36 said:


> I looked but I am pretty shit at Twitter and couldn't see much going on especially considering the vileness people spout over shit like this. Also -
> 
> 
> And I think this means me for posting that dig of hers yesterday.
> ...


Just ignore her. Seriously, why give her the satisfaction?


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> You seem genuinely baffled that people haven't accepted your bold assertions notwithstanding that you've "pointed out" things "several times".



I'm not baffled that the other poster hasn't accepted it, I'm baffled by the claim I've not answered the question, seemingly because I've not accepted the point made by the other posted. I've answered the question several times...


----------



## dynamicbaddog (May 21, 2015)

I'm a student at Goldsmiths and Bahar has my unconditional solidarity. She is an excellent Welfare and Diversity officer, and this is reflected in the fact that she has been elected to that post twice in a row. As things stand there are all sorts of cutbacks looming for students, for instance all the dyslexia tutors are being forced to re apply for their jobs, one to one mentoring might not exist next academic year  plus there is the threat of   cuts to the allowances granted to disabled students. Bahar has been extremely vocal in opposing all of  this - no wonder management hate her and have aided the media shitstorm that has been whipped up.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

But the media shit storm hasn't had anything to do with her being vocal about cuts, granted management might not like her but do you not think the media attention is partly her own fault given what was posted even after she first gained attention in the press?


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

dynamicbaddog said:


> I'm a student at Goldsmiths and Bahar has my unconditional solidarity. She is an excellent Welfare and Diversity officer, and this is reflected in the fact that she has been elected to that post twice in a row. As things stand there are all sorts of cutbacks looming for students, for instance all the dyslexia tutors are being forced to re apply for their jobs, one to one mentoring might not exist next academic year  plus there is the threat of   cuts to the allowances granted to disabled students. Bahar has been extremely vocal in opposing all of  this - no wonder management hate her and have aided the media shitstorm that has been whipped up.


Has she explained why she uses racist and classist language in the course of her role?


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

dynamicbaddog said:


> I'm a student at Goldsmiths and Bahar has my unconditional solidarity. She is an excellent Welfare and Diversity officer, and this is reflected in the fact that she has been elected to that post twice in a row. As things stand there are all sorts of cutbacks looming for students, for instance all the dyslexia tutors are being forced to re apply for their jobs, one to one mentoring might not exist next academic year  plus there is the threat of   cuts to the allowances granted to disabled students. Bahar has been extremely vocal in opposing all of  this - no wonder management hate her and have aided the media shitstorm that has been whipped up.



If she is doing the good work you say (which I have no reason to doubt), it's all the more disappointing that she seems to have played into the hands of those interested in ousting her by posting such daft nonsense.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> Not all trans* people are born as men or women. There are other biological combinations.



True. In general, however, we are *mostly* socialised as either male or female, however arbitrary or misguided the categorisation is. The problem that this creates is that *that* socialisation can have "knock-on" effects for both trans and cis people. Gender roles are so normalised (still!  ) that even if/when a person educates themselves out of binarism, there's still the problem of educating every other person to do so too.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

8ball said:


> "Safe space" seems to have a wide semantic range.


safe space is where i keep my contraband


----------



## DotCommunist (May 21, 2015)

iirc from the other thread on this her rival for the election was umbraged at losing so went through her TL for dirt and found it. That don't make what she tweeted right or anything but worth remembering theres other egos involved here


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> iirc from the other thread on this her rival for the election was umbraged at losing so went through her TL for dirt and found it. That don't make what she tweeted right or anything but worth remembering theres other egos involved here


that was someone else.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

dynamicbaddog said:


> I'm a student at Goldsmiths and Bahar has my unconditional solidarity. She is an excellent Welfare and Diversity officer, and this is reflected in the fact that she has been elected to that post twice in a row. As things stand there are all sorts of cutbacks looming for students, for instance all the dyslexia tutors are being forced to re apply for their jobs, one to one mentoring might not exist next academic year  plus there is the threat of   cuts to the allowances granted to disabled students. Bahar has been extremely vocal in opposing all of  this - no wonder management hate her and have aided the media shitstorm that has been whipped up.


when i was a student i was elected to all sorts of things, from the ulu executive to the nus london area as well as my own college. i think i won something like 50 elections all told which by your criterion must mean i was some sort of demi-god.

i wouldn't argue my repeated election was on its own proof i was doing a good job though.

oh: and i would just like to remind you that the people who froth most about things are generally the ones who get the least done.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> that was someone else.


oh. I get confused. a lot.

carry on


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> oh. I get confused. a lot.
> 
> carry on


it's an easy mistake to make - it's baffling that there's two separate threads for two different gobshite officers at a minor London university...


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> let me put it this way, for the hard of thinking. if trans women have brain activity patterns which are similar to those of 'born women' then it would be reasonable to assume there is some commonality.


 
Any such presumptive commonality begins and ends with brain imaging.  There is zero basis for extrapolating such observations into social behavior.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> Any such presumptive commonality begins and ends with brain imaging.  There is zero basis for extrapolating such observations into social behavior.


and you base this on your research into usury i suppose.


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Look like behave like a woman  woman
> Look like behave like a man man


 
Up to a point.  But what about: looks like a woman, behaves like a woman, considers self to be a man?

That's the salient case imo.


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> which is why i made no such extrapolation.


 
Then what is the point of remarking on the commonality?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> blah blah blah


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> The idea that brain structures determine behaviour is quite outdated. Behaviour can change brain structures. It's the relationship between the two that's important. Dialectical, if you like.


 
My God, Blagsta has got this one right.  Did someone steal his computer?


----------



## likesfish (May 21, 2015)

She's an idiot while the first incident was stupid and blown out of proportion she decided to double down on the stupidity with the #killallwhitemen which really doesnt look cool and radical in your not in the " in crowd"
 Just looks stupid and student lefty politics to a tee 
  Made epically more  because she may identify as a strong black woman.


Everyone else see s a pretensious lefty student doing a non job badly


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> True. In general, however, we are *mostly* socialised as either male or female, however arbitrary or misguided the categorisation is. The problem that this creates is that *that* socialisation can have "knock-on" effects for both trans and cis people. Gender roles are so normalised (still!  ) that even if/when a person educates themselves out of binarism, there's still the problem of educating every other person to do so too.


Yes. And this is one of the things that I find odd about the 80s style feminist trans-exclusionary discourse at the moment - it rejects the notion of biology as destiny but then builds and reinforces an account of patriarchal traditional genders based on biology which leads to the same end and allows no room for those resisting, or for those who differ.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 21, 2015)

dynamicbaddog said:


> I'm a student at Goldsmiths and Bahar has my unconditional solidarity. She is an excellent Welfare and Diversity officer, and this is reflected in the fact that she has been elected to that post twice in a row. As things stand there are all sorts of cutbacks looming for students, for instance all the dyslexia tutors are being forced to re apply for their jobs, one to one mentoring might not exist next academic year  plus there is the threat of   cuts to the allowances granted to disabled students. Bahar has been extremely vocal in opposing all of  this - no wonder management hate her and have aided the media shitstorm that has been whipped up.


question her on what sort of people make up white trash.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 21, 2015)

she might learn something about her OWN prejudices then...


----------



## BigMoaner (May 21, 2015)

anyway, she's just a kid. kids say stupid shit all the time.


----------



## kabbes (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> well there is growing evidence whether you like it or not - examples posted in my previous post... genes, brain structures... frankly there is likely to be more found as research into this area progresses - that isn't to say that it isn't multifaceted but there do seem to be some biological traits at least related to or commonly found in transsexualism, ergo the trans skeptic position is a bit dubious


 Those examples massively beg the question.  They assume that differences in brain structure cause differences in gender rather than being a consequence of assuming a gender. 

In fact, we know that the brain is incredibly plastic and changes its physical structures in response to our experiences.  Given that, it is hardly a surprise that groups of people that have been socialised to associate with distinct gender roles will have brains that have adapted into those roles.


----------



## dynamicbaddog (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> But the media shit storm hasn't had anything to do with her being vocal about cuts, granted management might not like her but do you not think the media attention is partly her own fault given what was posted even after she first gained attention in the press?





BigMoaner said:


> question her on what sort of people make up white trash.


it was a jokey comment taken out of context and blown up out of all proportion 
over Easter Bahar was involved in an occupation over the planned restructuring of disability services (as well as other issues) After the occupation ended there were several meetings organised to discuss this and the way forward, one of those meetings was a BME women only meeting. A student who opposed the occupation picked up on this and wrote an article for The Tab about it.  - this then was regurgitated by the right wing press  who went through her twitter feed picking up on stuff she posted ages ago.


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> anyway, she's just a kid. kids say stupid shit all the time.


 
She doesn't look like a kid.  Around 30, I'd say, like most student politicians.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

dynamicbaddog said:


> it was a jokey comment taken out of context and blown up out of all proportion
> over Easter Bahar was involved in an occupation over the planned restructuring of disability services (as well as other issues) After the occupation ended there were several meetings organised to discuss this and the way forward, one of those meetings was a BME women only meeting. A student who opposed the occupation picked up on this and wrote an article for The Tab about it.  - this then was regurgitated by the right wing press  who went through her twitter feed picking up on stuff she posted ages ago.


and it seems there was quite a bit to find.


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Those examples massively beg the question.  They assume that differences in brain structure cause differences in gender rather than being a consequence of assuming a gender.
> 
> In fact, we know that the brain is incredibly plastic and changes its physical structures in response to our experiences.  Given that, it is hardly a surprise that groups of people that have been socialised to associate with distinct gender roles will have brains that have adapted into those roles.


 
Exactly.  This is why evolutionary psychology is such a load of crap.


----------



## smokedout (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> and that's the attitude that left me with no support when i was raped.



why didn't you set up your own support service, for people like you?

(I'm not saying you should have obviously, just pointing out what an inpractical and inhumane response that is)


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> anyway, she's just a kid. kids say stupid shit all the time.



Nah, she isn't a kid. Also she is in a position of influence and power. Saying what she did wasn't just unprofessional it was offensive and an abuse of her role. 

Many people experience a status/role conflict between what they would like to say and do/be themselves and what is appropriate and 'proper' to do/say at work. She doesn't get a hall pass, none of us do.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 21, 2015)

dynamicbaddog said:


> it was a jokey comment taken out of context and blown up out of all proportion
> over Easter Bahar was involved in an occupation over the planned restructuring of disability services (as well as other issues) After the occupation ended there were several meetings organised to discuss this and the way forward, one of those meetings was a BME women only meeting. A student who opposed the occupation picked up on this and wrote an article for The Tab about it.  - this then was regurgitated by the right wing press  who went through her twitter feed picking up on stuff she posted ages ago.



kill all white men
"white trash"
Sneering over the "tears of white men" poster.

she's acted stupidly and probably doesn't deserve the internet shit storm
but she's not my cup of tea. i don't really know how to excuse away the comments above.


----------



## smokedout (May 21, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Those examples massively beg the question.  They assume that differences in brain structure cause differences in gender rather than being a consequence of assuming a gender.
> 
> In fact, we know that the brain is incredibly plastic and changes its physical structures in response to our experiences.  Given that, it is hardly a surprise that groups of people that have been socialised to associate with distinct gender roles will have brains that have adapted into those roles.



do you not think the researchers also know that?  all that can be said is that we do not know whether transsexuality has a genetic, biological or social root, there is some evidence that suggests it might be biological but this is far from conclusive for the reasons you give. no-one knows though and to say otherwise in one direction or the other is dishonest and doesn't reflect the science.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> The sex that the medics identify at birth mostly assigns the gender that the baby's subsequent life is constructed around.



Yep, and sometimes the assignment is arbitrary, or based on parental preference. Not a good way to start life.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh and any self-constructed or -realised gender which arises later arises DESPITE years of (as it turns out) frequently inappropriate socialisation: you read about people who realised they were in the wrong body at an early age, before the time when those in the right body start thinking much about sex. or gender.



We should, of course, reflect on the fact that socialisation can be a polite term for what is actually very thorough social conditioning.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 21, 2015)

smokedout said:


> do you not think the researchers also know that?  all that can be said is that we do not know whether transsexuality has a genetic,* biological or social root*, there is some evidence that suggests it might be biological but this is far from conclusive for the reasons you give. no-one knows though and to say otherwise in one direction or the other is dishonest and doesn't reflect the science.


It often doesn't make sense trying to separate these out. It is both - it is nurture of nature, rather than nurture or nature. tbf in biology this is pretty much an old argument nowadays, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has been put to bed outside those circles.


----------



## dendrite (May 21, 2015)

dynamicbaddog said:


> I'm a student at Goldsmiths and Bahar has my unconditional solidarity. She is an excellent Welfare and Diversity officer, and this is reflected in the fact that she has been elected to that post twice in a row. As things stand there are all sorts of cutbacks looming for students, for instance all the dyslexia tutors are being forced to re apply for their jobs, one to one mentoring might not exist next academic year  plus there is the threat of   cuts to the allowances granted to disabled students. Bahar has been extremely vocal in opposing all of  this - no wonder management hate her and have aided the media shitstorm that has been whipped up.



How much bloody _effort_ has it taken to subdue your sense of justice / harm to the extent you include calls for genocide in the judgement 'excellent'? Can you make a video instructable of the itemised steps you took to make your judgement that twisted?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh and any self-constructed or -realised gender which arises later arises DESPITE years of (as it turns out) frequently inappropriate socialisation: you read about people who realised they were in the wrong body at an early age, before the time when those in the right body start thinking much about sex. or gender.



We should, of course, reflect on the fact that socialisation can be a polite term for what is actually very thorough social conditioning.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> kill all white men
> "white trash"
> Sneering over the "tears of white men" poster.
> 
> ...


* i was tired and emotional
* the phrases are taken out of context
* it wasn't me

three popular excuses for any situation


----------



## Mation (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> The idea that brain structures determine behaviour is quite outdated. Behaviour can change brain structures. It's the relationship between the two that's important. Dialectical, if you like.


That doesn't make any sense. Do you have a link for what you mean?


----------



## DotCommunist (May 21, 2015)

Mation said:


> That doesn't make any sense. Do you have a link for what you mean?


chicken and egg situation- I read a study about schizophrenia causing brain shrinkage once, and the essay critued the original study for its sample having only used long term users of mental health drugs (old school ones. Tri cyclic)

also- feedback. Brain structures form and unform, when one is young. Thats why there is acknowledged to be a certain 'window' of time best suited for learning your letters. Not to say no human ever did become a great poet after learning his/her letters in middle age, humans are a wildly diverse bunch ennit. Brain plasticity is the phrase I remember. And all tied in with huge amount of socialisation we go through in our early years.


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

Mation said:


> That doesn't make any sense.


 
It does make sense.

Scientists like to claim that brain chemistry determines behavior, because they can make it do so in their laboratories.  In the real world, however, it is the other way around: behavior determines brain chemistry.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> Yes. And this is one of the things that I find odd about the 80s style feminist trans-exclusionary discourse at the moment - it rejects the notion of biology as destiny but then builds and reinforces an account of patriarchal traditional genders based on biology which leads to the same end and allows no room for those resisting, or for those who differ.



Having their cake and eating it, and if you question the intellectual basis of their (to be bluntly reductive) biological determinism, then your questioning will be taken to proceed from your own "capture" by traditional patriarchal notions of gender.
As with the concept of "safe space", "gender" is increasingly being used to mean whatever a particular ideologue wants it to mean.


----------



## likesfish (May 21, 2015)

She was in a paid job that sort of means you beha e professionally

Having a bme women only meeting might be legit But the male tears sign was unprofessional and drawing a huge target on herself and not expecting people to throw rocks not happening. so the shitstorm has started do you maybe keep your stupid comments to yourself or decide #killallwhitemen  is too funny not to share ?
 Hmm hard decision


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbf in biology this is pretty much an old argument nowadays


 
Hardly.  Entire disciplines--evolutionary psychology, cognitive neuroscience--have been constructed on the assumption that the physical brain determines behavior.  The whole edifice of social Darwinism rests upon the same assumption.


----------



## Mation (May 21, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> chicken and egg situation- I read a study about schizophrenia causing brain shrinkage once, and the essay critued the original study for its sample having only used long term users of mental health drugs (old school ones. Tri cyclic)
> 
> also- feedback. Brain structures form and unform, when one is young. Thats why there is acknowledged to be a certain 'window' of time best suited for learning your letters. Not to say no human ever did become a great poet after learning his/her letters in middle age, humans are a wildly diverse bunch ennit. Brain plasticity is the phrase I remember. And all tied in with huge amount of socialisation we go through in our early years.


That doesn't address the question though. Well it might, but I'd need to see exactly what Blagsta meant to know 



phildwyer said:


> It does make sense.
> 
> Scientists like to claim that brain chemistry determines behavior, because they can make it do so in their laboratories.  In the real world, however, it is the other way around: behavior determines brain chemistry.


Yes, it makes sense to you. You're a dualist.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It often doesn't make sense trying to separate these out. It is both - it is nurture of nature, rather than nurture or nature. tbf in biology this is pretty much an old argument nowadays, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has been put to bed outside those circles.



Well quite. Sense *can* be made out of people trying to separate nature and nurture, but only if you look beyond the action to what drives it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 21, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> Hardly.  Entire disciplines--evolutionary psychology, cognitive neuroscience--have been constructed on the assumption that the physical brain determines behavior.  The whole edifice of social Darwinism rests upon the same assumption.


'the physical brain determines behaviour'

I don't even know what you intend to mean by that. If you mean that most scientific disciplines do not work from dualist assumptions - in fact, use a working assumption that precludes dualism - then yes, I think you're right. 

How else does one do science? A, B, and C are explicable this way; but D is due to magic!


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'the physical brain determines behaviour'
> 
> I don't even know what you intend to mean by that. If you mean that most scientific disciplines do not work from dualist assumptions - in fact, use a working assumption that precludes dualism - then yes, I think you're right.
> 
> How else does one do science? A, B, and C are explicable this way; but D is due to magic!


 
One could point out that the physical brain is itself formed by ideas. 

But that would contradict the dogmatic materialism under which scientists operate.


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

Mation said:


> That doesn't make any sense. Do you have a link for what you mean?



What we do affects our brain structures. For example, professional musicians have bigger brain regions for motor skills and auditory processing. 

http://m.jneurosci.org/content/23/27/9240.full

Also affects gene expression 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150327090905.htm


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> It does make sense.
> 
> Scientists like to claim that brain chemistry determines behavior, because they can make it do so in their laboratories.  In the real world, however, it is the other way around: behavior determines brain chemistry.



No, that's not accurate either. It's more accurate to say that our brains and "us" (which includes our social context, relationships etc) exist in a dialectical relationship. 

You might be interested in Raymond Tallis's book Aping Mankind


----------



## Mation (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> What we do affects our brain structures. For example, professional musicians have bigger brain regions for motor skills and auditory processing.
> 
> http://m.jneurosci.org/content/23/27/9240.full
> 
> ...


Ok. So how are we doing the things that affect our brain structures? What's doing the doing?


----------



## Santino (May 21, 2015)

Have you ever noticed that physically fit people are more likely to take exercise?


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> I respect your freedom to identify yourself how ever you want.
> 
> I have more of an issue where the expression of that identity clashes with some other women's rights to associate with whomever they choose, based on their own conception of identity.
> 
> There's a tension there.  But not one that it's my place to resolve.


So if I chose to exclude lesbians or black women from women's spaces that would be fine? If not why not? And why is it OK to exclude just trans women alone among all the differently defining women?

Why your argument is wrong and dishonest is that the majority of feminists I meet and talk to are fully trans inclusive and define gender in the same way I would. And yet I am excluded and they are not. 

Worse than that!! Trans men who identify as men and who have penises are included! 

The Trans Exclusionary argument is entirely fallacious and is just a way to justify bigotry.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> No, that's not accurate either. It's more accurate to say that our brains and "us" (which includes our social context, relationships etc) exist in a dialectical relationship.
> 
> You might be interested in Raymond Tallis's book Aping Mankind



Do you mean ' an interaction of conflicting ideas, forces, etc.' when you use the term 'dialectical'?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> The Trans Exclusionary argument is entirely fallacious and is just a way to justify bigotry.


or phallacious


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

Mation said:


> Ok. So how are we doing the things that affect our brain structures? What's doing the doing?



We are.


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Do you mean ' an interaction of conflicting ideas, forces, etc.' when you use the term 'dialectical'?



I mean that the two things which appear to be in opposition to each other actually exist as a whole, feedback on each other and one cannot be understood without the other.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I mean that the two things which appear to be in opposition to each other actually exist as a whole, feedback on each other and one cannot be understood without the other.



I think it's helpful to define such terms and explain what we mean when using 'terminology'. So thanks for doing that.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> anyway, she's just a kid. kids say stupid shit all the time.



Actually she's an adult in higher education.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> We are.



It isn't just what we do, it's also what is done to us.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> So if I chose to exclude lesbians or black women from women's spaces that would be fine? If not why not? And why is it OK to exclude just trans women alone among all the differently defining women?



The intention behind women-only spaces is to exclude men; nobody seriously thinks it's necessary to exclude lesbians or black women to realise that intention.  Some people believe it is necessary to exclude trans women, either because they believe that trans women are men, or that men might claim to be trans women in order to infiltrate those spaces.


----------



## Mation (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> We are.


So, unless you're a dualist, if we are, our brains are. Our brains are changing themselves. Behaviours do not have lives independent of the brains doing them. No?


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

To me the brain structure stuff, etc, however it turns out, is pretty much irrelevent when considered in the context of how trans people of both genders, and other variations, actually feel, how they behave and how they identify. 

Gender is mostly a construct and they vary through the ages, but the construct people choose is pretty much hard-wired into us from an early age. Intersex people and the way they have been abused by medical science teaches us that gender identity is innate. Studies carried out on young children also show that children know exactly what gender they are from about the age of 4 - including trans children. 

Plenty of trans women barely change their appearance and tend to wear androgynous or even masculine clothing because thats how they feel most comfortable. So no gender stereotypes being reinforced there. Not more than many cis women do already anyway! 

Trans people are as varied as varied as cis people. We do not reinforce gender stereotypes we merely do as everyone else does, choose the one that suits us best!! It helps to stop us getting beaten up for one reason and in my case my depression has stopped now that i can stop trying to act male and pander to male stereotypes, and people accept me as female.


----------



## Wilf (May 21, 2015)

If we take this out of the realm of principle or theory and discuss it as simple day to day experience, I'd ask these questions: if trans women are included in a women only space, what harm is done? What are the non-trans women stopped from doing?  What solidarity is breached?


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> The intention behind women-only spaces is to exclude men; nobody seriously thinks it's necessary to exclude lesbians or black women to realise that intention.  Some people believe it is necessary to exclude trans women, either because they believe that trans women are men, or that men might claim to be trans women in order to infiltrate those spaces.


a tiny minority and i've yet to meet one in real life. they are scared because our existence shows their theories to be complete bullshit. And I repeat, I am a woman. If you question my gender please go and question everyone else's.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> So if I chose to exclude lesbians or black women from women's spaces that would be fine? If not why not? And why is it OK to exclude just trans women alone among all the differently defining women?
> 
> Why your argument is wrong and dishonest is that the majority of feminists I meet and talk to are fully trans inclusive and define gender in the same way I would. And yet I am excluded and they are not.
> 
> ...



The intention behind women-only spaces is to exclude men; nobody seriously thinks it's necessary to exclude lesbians or black women to realise that intention. Some women - I accept your point that it's not a majority of feminists, of course - believe it is necessary to exclude trans women, either because they believe that trans women are men, or that men might claim to be trans women in order to infiltrate those spaces.  I've not argued that is OK.  I've already pointed out that it's not for me to decide.  And I fully accept that a trans exclusionary position might be motivated by bigotry.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> a tiny minority and i've yet to meet one in real life. they are scared because our existence shows their theories to be complete bullshit. And I repeat, I am a woman. If you question my gender please go and question everyone else's.



I don't question your gender.  If you're a woman, that's cool with me.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> I don't question your gender.  If you're a woman, that's cool with me.


stop reinforcing their bullshit arguments then. I've talked to the trans excluders online and they always start by calling me a man. They are not open to debate and they do not want to debate.


----------



## Spymaster (May 21, 2015)

How is _cis_ pronounced?

Is it a recently coined term? I've never heard of it.


----------



## 8ball (May 21, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> How is _cis_ pronounced?
> 
> Is it a recently coined term? I've never heard of it.


 
As in the abbreviation of 'sister'.

Been used in the sciences for a long time.  Especially chemistry.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

8ball said:


> As in the abbreviation of 'sister'.
> 
> Been used in the sciences for a long time.  Especially chemistry.


and roman provinces e.g. cisalpine gaul


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> Is it a recently coined term? I've never heard of it.


there's no need to trumpet your ignorance


----------



## joustmaster (May 21, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> How is _cis_ pronounced?
> 
> Is it a recently coined term? I've never heard of it.


like a snake would say it.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 21, 2015)

do I have to drag out my 'cis/terfs are doing it for themselves' gag again? Oh wait I just have. Reduced to repeats, like a broken has-been.


----------



## Wilf (May 21, 2015)

Wilf said:


> If we take this out of the realm of principle or theory and discuss it as simple day to day experience, I'd ask these questions: if trans women are included in a women only space, what harm is done? What are the non-trans women stopped from doing?  What solidarity is breached?


And getting into conversation with myself... a further point: if some women want to exclude trans women from a women only space, do they extend that notion to the wider society? In other words would they also advocate trans women being excluded from women's loos, changing rooms etc?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> do I have to drag out my 'cis/terfs are doing it for themselves' gag again? Oh wait I just have. Reduced to repeats, like a broken has-been.


Broken hasBeen dotCommunist, BBC


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Wilf said:


> And getting into conversation with myself... a further point: if some women want to exclude trans women from a women only space, do they extend that notion to the wider society? In other words would they also advocate trans women being excluded from women's loos, changing rooms etc?


On that point - in the US cis women who do not conform to the gender norm have already been attacked by transphobes while using the toilet.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> stop reinforcing their bullshit arguments then. I've talked to the trans excluders online and they always start by calling me a man. They are not open to debate and they do not want to debate.



I haven't done that, though.  I've been nothing but respectful: I've acknowledged your womanhood; I've stated that the exclusion of trans women is a minority opinion amongst feminists; I've agreed that it might (in some cases) be motivated by bigotry.

However,whilst saying that it's not for me (as a man) to say what women's approach to women-only spaces should be, I am uncomfortable with the idea that a group of cis women should not be allowed to organise based upon their own conception of their own gender, without others imposing themselves in their space - especially if that deters some women form using those spaces.  I recognise that there is a compelling counter argument i.e. that the alternative also prevents some women (i.e. trans women) from using those spaces.

I guess, if pushed, my gut feeling would be pro-inclusion (if only on the practical weighing of harms, as per Wilf's  posts), but I still feel the position is not as black-and-white as you make out from a theoretical/ethical perspective.

I thought we were having a sensible discussion, but maybe we're on the cusp of it becoming too heated (and I understand why you would be passionate about this issue), and I should bow out.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> I thought we were having a sensible discussion


on urban?


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> do I have to drag out my 'cis/terfs are doing it for themselves' gag again? Oh wait I just have. Reduced to repeats, like a broken has-been.



Shameless.  

Was a good gag the first time round, though.


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I think it's helpful to define such terms and explain what we mean when using 'terminology'. So thanks for doing that.



Yeah, sorry, I think often there's an assumption that everyone is familiar with certain words and concepts, we should remember this isn't really the case.


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> It isn't just what we do, it's also what is done to us.



Yes, it's about relationships, dynamic processes rather than a strict A to B causality.


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

Mation said:


> So, unless you're a dualist, if we are, our brains are. Our brains are changing themselves. Behaviours do not have lives independent of the brains doing them. No?



I'm not a dualist, I'm a materialist. However considering brains in isolation tells us very little. We exist in relationships, can only exist in relationships. Reducing things to their fundamental parts only gets us so far. We have to reintroduce a holistic understanding at some point.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Yeah, sorry, I think often there's an assumption that everyone is familiar with certain words and concepts, we should remember this isn't really the case.



I am familiar with the term but it has other applications too. But yes, best not to assume. I also dislike the overuse of terminology because it can exclude people from conversations. Speaking plainly, where possible, is the the most inclusive way in my experience.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Athos said:


> I haven't done that, though.  I've been nothing but respectful: I've acknowledged your womanhood; I've stated that the exclusion of trans women is a minority opinion amongst feminists; I've agreed that it might (in some cases) be motivated by bigotry.
> 
> However,whilst saying that it's not for me (as a man) to say what women's approach to women-only spaces should be, I am uncomfortable with the idea that a group of cis women should not be allowed to organise based upon their own conception of their own gender, without others imposing themselves in their space - especially if that deters some women form using those spaces.  I recognise that there is a compelling counter argument i.e. that the alternative also prevents some women (i.e. trans women) from using those spaces.
> 
> ...


sorry if I came across as aggressive but I see you actually repeating fallacious arguments from people that actively organise to deny that trans exists - men and women and non binary - and over decades have worked to have our rights removed. They're not happy to just deny us from entering women only spaces, most of which we are invited into (in my case, I would never enter a space in which I was wanted, not least because I've heard terrible stories of trans women who have been seriously abused and assaulted by bigoted cis women and I would never put myself into a vulnerable position like that) and yet the T.E.s lobby to have us barred, but they want to deny us any kind of right at all, and work to achieve that. The amount of abuse I have received from T.E. cis women and their lovely male transphobic sidekicks (funny how they tolerate men when it helps reinforce their bullshit) including an article in the New Statesmen that provoked such bile aimed at me (no right to reply) that I had to be prescribed anti anxiety meds and have time off work


----------



## Blagsta (May 21, 2015)

8ball said:


> As in the abbreviation of 'sister'.
> 
> Been used in the sciences for a long time.  Especially chemistry.



Yeah, cis fats and trans fats, iirc from the far distant past of A level chemistry (I failed. Twice.)


----------



## Orang Utan (May 21, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Look like behave like a woman  woman
> Look like behave like a man man
> 
> Their maybe people who fall in the middle shouldnt really be too much of an issue


How does one behave like a man or a woman? Aren't all supposedly masculine and feminine traits actually just human ones, with none exclusive to just one gender?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> How does one behave like a man or a woman?


by behaving like an adult.

next.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> sorry if I came across as aggressive but I see you actually repeating fallacious arguments from people that actively organise to deny that trans exists - men and women and non binary - and over decades have worked to have our rights removed. They're not happy to just deny us from entering women only spaces, most of which we are invited into (in my case, I would never enter a space in which I was wanted, not least because I've heard terrible stories of trans women who have been seriously abused and assaulted by bigoted cis women and I would never put myself into a vulnerable position like that) and yet the T.E.s lobby to have us barred, but they want to deny us any kind of right at all, and work to achieve that. The amount of abuse I have received from T.E. cis women and their lovely male transphobic sidekicks (funny how they tolerate men when it helps reinforce their bullshit) including an article in the New Statesmen that provoked such bile aimed at me (no right to reply) that I had to be prescribed anti anxiety meds and have time off work



The New Statesman are all upper middle class twats.


----------



## TopCat (May 21, 2015)

Wilf said:


> And getting into conversation with myself... a further point: if some women want to exclude trans women from a women only space, do they extend that notion to the wider society? In other words would they also advocate trans women being excluded from women's loos, changing rooms etc?


Yes they do want to excludr all transvwoman women


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> How does one behave like a man or a woman? Aren't all supposedly masculine and feminine traits actually just human ones, with none exclusive to just one gender?


 
But society codes certain behaviors in gendered terms.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Speaking of which, I did my own toilet selfie this summer!


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> How does one behave like a man or a woman? Aren't all supposedly masculine and feminine traits actually just human ones, with none exclusive to just one gender?


I don't know but I used to always get ridiculed for behaving like a girl when i was younger so i guess you need to ask those people not me. I just behave like me.


----------



## Athos (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> sorry if I came across as aggressive but I see you actually repeating fallacious arguments from people that actively organise to deny that trans exists - men and women and non binary - and over decades have worked to have our rights removed. They're not happy to just deny us from entering women only spaces, most of which we are invited into (in my case, I would never enter a space in which I was wanted, not least because I've heard terrible stories of trans women who have been seriously abused and assaulted by bigoted cis women and I would never put myself into a vulnerable position like that) and yet the T.E.s lobby to have us barred, but they want to deny us any kind of right at all, and work to achieve that. The amount of abuse I have received from T.E. cis women and their lovely male transphobic sidekicks (funny how they tolerate men when it helps reinforce their bullshit) including an article in the New Statesmen that provoked such bile aimed at me (no right to reply) that I had to be prescribed anti anxiety meds and have time off work



I was trying to tease out the issues by offering differing perspectives; I thought I'd made it clear that they were not necessarily views I hold.  But I guess the danger is that people attribute those views to anyone playing the devil's advocate.  And I certainly wouldn't want to be mistaken for someone who discriminates against any group.  So I think I'll leave it there.

To be honest, it's not the first time that approach has landed me in hot water on here; I'll think twice before offering any theoretical talking points in areas which (understandably) are very emotive, even where (as is the case here) I believe there's a legitimate debate to be had that's a lot more nuanced than bigotry on one side versus intransigence on the other.

I'm sorry about what happened to you, and wish you all the best.


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> No, that's not accurate either. It's more accurate to say that our brains and "us" (which includes our social context, relationships etc) exist in a dialectical relationship.


 
I'd have a hard job coming up with any human behavior in the real world that is determined by physical processes within the brain.  That only ever happens under laboratory conditions.



Blagsta said:


> You might be interested in Raymond Tallis's book Aping Mankind


 
I'll check it out, ta.


----------



## emanymton (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> Alternatively (and to paraphrase Butler) accepting that gender is something that you do, rather than what you are, seems to me to be a way to start to resolve the dichotomy.


Or maybe gender is something you experience?


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

emanymton said:


> Or maybe gender is something you experience?


Yes I think we all experience our own and other people's expressions of gender.


----------



## J Ed (May 21, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> sorry if I came across as aggressive but I see you actually repeating fallacious arguments from people that actively organise to deny that trans exists - men and women and non binary - and over decades have worked to have our rights removed. They're not happy to just deny us from entering women only spaces, most of which we are invited into (in my case, I would never enter a space in which I was wanted, not least because I've heard terrible stories of trans women who have been seriously abused and assaulted by bigoted cis women and I would never put myself into a vulnerable position like that) and yet the T.E.s lobby to have us barred, but they want to deny us any kind of right at all, and work to achieve that. The amount of abuse I have received from T.E. cis women and their lovely male transphobic sidekicks (funny how they tolerate men when it helps reinforce their bullshit) including an article in the New Statesmen that provoked such bile aimed at me (no right to reply) that I had to be prescribed anti anxiety meds and have time off work



Sorry that you have been put through all of that, you should not have to. These people are all dickheads and in particular The New $tatesman is a scum newspaper written by scum for scum


----------



## likesfish (May 21, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> How does one behave like a man or a woman? Aren't all supposedly masculine and feminine traits actually just human ones, with none exclusive to just one gender?



Pint of beer for a man
 Fruit based drink for a lady

Next question 

Seriously if you want to enter a woman only place and by your actions you make other people uncomfatable you shouldnt be there.


----------



## Sea Star (May 21, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Seriously if you want to enter a woman only place and by your actions you make other people uncomfatable you shouldnt be there.


That could apply to a lot of cis women. And trans men.

Also im not going to be told by a man where i as a woman can and cant go


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

Dowie said:


> I've not ignored it, I've replied several times pointing out that transwomen aren't men.  Pointing out that transwomen were raised as men and were born as men then banging on about oppression of women by men really isn't relevant. Some transwomen still have male sexual organs, so what... are they OK then if they've had surgery?



You've ignored it again. Do you still think that your earlier description of women who have concerns or ideological issues about mtf trans people being allowed into women-only spaces or discussions that can only concern women with female sexual organs as "being hung up about sexual organs" - with its accompanying sub-text that they are slightly hysterical or uptight - is ok? 

You've ignored the context that much feminist theory is about how reproductivity is a key part of the issue of how women end up oppressed and therefore my point about "male oppression" is to show how your casual dismissal of "sexual organs" and the silly womenz who are "hung up" about them is missing a pretty massive point. 

I've never called mtf trans people "men" btw, so I don't know why you keep making this implication?

I predict you will now post that 'oppression of women by men isn't relevant' as though this is refuting anything I've said rather than missing the point.


----------



## Dowie (May 21, 2015)

I've not ignored anything, I just don't agree with you... I could claim you're ignoring the points I've made as you don't seem to be taking them into account - it is a bit pointless and we'll go round in circles so I think I'll leave it at that... no point in repeating what I've already posted on the matter.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

In terms of transphobia, on a personal level I wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings and am happy of course to call anyone by any name or pronoun they want, but I don't believe in the theory of gender or definition of womanhood that seems to have been argued on this thread.  Are some people taking the position that not believing in this or disagreeing is transphobic?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> In terms of transphobia, on a personal level I wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings and am happy of course to call anyone by any name or pronoun they want, but I don't believe in the theory of gender or definition of womanhood that seems to have been argued on this thread.  Are some people taking the position that not believing in this or disagreeing is transphobic?



I can only speak for me of course but as I read it the 'phobic' part is in the fear that allowing trans women into women's spaces makes them unsafe. It suggests that they are not seen or believed to be women and that they are a danger.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I can only speak for me of course but as I read it the 'phobic' part is in the fear that allowing trans women into women's spaces makes them unsafe. It suggests that they are not seen or believed to be women and that they are a danger.


But surely that comes from the belief about how gender is defined?  If somewhere is a safe space because it is only accessed by women, then allowing people in who those using it do not believe to be women is what makes it feel unsafe.  So it still comes down to "accept this definition of what it is to be a woman or you are phobic".


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> In terms of transphobia, on a personal level I wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings and am happy of course to call anyone by any name or pronoun they want, but I don't believe in the theory of gender or definition of womanhood that seems to have been argued on this thread.  Are some people taking the position that not believing in this or disagreeing is transphobic?


It depends on how it's likely to play out in real life. For example - 1 in 2000 babies are born with a Disorder of Sex Development. So the likelihood of encountering one of those children in a career in education is quite high. If they are developing their own sense of gender which isn't necessarily matching biological sex, denying them (for example) using the girls toilet instead of the boys or vice versa is how not believing/disagreeing might play out to their detriment. In employment it's even clearer cut, where it's a protected characteristic.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

I note that trans/cis isn't on the wheel of oppression. Although I only did a quick google image search so it may have been updated.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I can only speak for me of course but as I read it the 'phobic' part is in the fear that allowing trans women into women's spaces makes them unsafe. It suggests that they are not seen or believed to be women and that they are a danger.


is the reason men are excluded from women only spaces because men are 'a danger'?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> But surely that comes from the belief about how gender is defined?  If somewhere is a safe space because it is only accessed by women, then allowing people in who those using it do not believe to be women is what makes it feel unsafe.  So it still comes down to "accept this definition of what it is to be a woman or you are phobic".



It comes from the individual making that judgement IME. You and I are both women yet I am sure we could find something we disagree on in terms of what it means to be a woman and how we should define it.

Yes, sure, if someone believes that you need to be born a woman n the biological sense to be defined as such the chances are they would feel uncomfortable and maybe unsafe allowing trans women to share women only spaces. That feeling of being 'unsafe' is fear/phobia.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> It depends on how it's likely to play out in real life. For example - 1 in 2000 babies are born with a Disorder of Sex Development. So the likelihood of encountering one of those children in a career in education is quite high. If they are developing their own sense of gender which isn't necessarily matching biological sex, denying them (for example) using the girls toilet instead of the boys or vice versa is how not believing/disagreeing might play out to their detriment. In employment it's even clearer cut, where it's a protected characteristic.


Lots of children do not behave in a way that matches stereotypical expectations of their gender.  When does it become a disorder?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> it the reason men are excluded from women only spaces because men are 'a danger'?



Sometimes yes. A danger in the sense that women may feel unsafe and restricted in sharing/being if men are around.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> It comes from the individual making that judgement IME. You and I are both women yet I am sure we could find something we disagree on in terms of what it means to be a woman and how we should define it.
> 
> Yes, sure, if someone believes that you need to be born a woman n the biological sense to be defined as such the chances are they would feel uncomfortable and maybe unsafe allowing trans women to share women only spaces. That feeling of being 'unsafe' is fear/phobia.


Don't women have good reasons to feel uncomfortable or unsafe in some situations around people who are born and socialised as male?


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Lots of children do not behave in a way that matches stereotypical expectations of their gender.  When does it become a disorder?


The disorder is of sex development not gender development.


----------



## co-op (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I can only speak for me of course but as I read it the 'phobic' part is in the fear that allowing trans women into women's spaces makes them unsafe. It suggests that they are not seen or believed to be women and that they are a danger.



Or maybe it's not to do with safety at all but just the common problem of people socialised as men hogging the conversation space when it's meant to be a place for women to discuss issues that only arise if you were born with female sexual organs?


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> The disorder is of sex development not gender development.


OK, so you're talking about something different here though - not transphobia?


----------



## tufty79 (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> Or maybe it's not to do with safety at all but just the common problem of people socialised as men hogging the conversation space when it's meant to be a place for women to discuss issues that only arise if you were born with female sexual organs?


I don't think that really applies in terms of refuges/rape crisis environments


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 21, 2015)

By women-only spaces are we talking about bogs, changing rooms and hospital wards? Cos I struggle to think of any others.

Personally I wouldn't have a problem. But I can imagine if I was ill on a hospital ward I might get jumpy sleeping in the same bay as a man (only cos I basically cannot sleep around strange men). If the trans woman was clearly, well, a woman, then it's no bother is it.

Toilets and changing rooms all have cubicles so I don't see the issue there.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> is the reason men are excluded from women only spaces because men are 'a danger'?



Exactly. This is why I loathe this stuff. You can try your hardest, being an egalitarian, and it isn't enough. You're guilty by genetic accident. I know the point they're trying to make, but don't they want to organise with white cis men who aren't dickheads? Turns out they do. But on bizarre terms.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Don't women have good reasons to feel uncomfortable or unsafe in some situations around people who are born and socialised as male?



Sometimes yes. However, it's not my experience that everything men are socialised to be is a 'danger' in that sense to women. Likewise as I am not a trans woman it feels pretty presumptious of me to decide how they dealt with those gender norms being imposed on them.

Pretty much how I feel when someone else tells me what it's like to be a woman/how I should feel about it or what it's like to me Mixed and what that means.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Don't women have good reasons to feel uncomfortable or unsafe in some situations around people who are born and socialised as male?



Because all men are the same?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Exactly. This is why I loathe this stuff. You can try your hardest, being an egalitarian, and it isn't enough. You're guilty by genetic accident. I know the point they're trying to make, but don't they want to organise with white cis men who aren't dickheads? Turns out they do. But on bizarre terms.



I wasn't trying to be offensive I was using danger as an opposite to safe and definately not saying all men are unsafe.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Because all men are the same?


Yes exactly, all men are the same and they are all just waiting for an opportunity to attack women.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> OK, so you're talking about something different here though - not transphobia?


No, I'm talking about what happens when someone's biological sex doesn't align with their gender and how transphobia may manifest when the person with mismatching biological sex and gender tries to do something about it.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> By women-only spaces are we talking about bogs, changing rooms and hospital wards? Cos I struggle to think of any others.
> 
> Personally I wouldn't have a problem. But I can imagine if I was ill on a hospital ward I might get jumpy sleeping in the same bay as a man (only cos I basically cannot sleep around strange men). If the trans woman was clearly, well, a woman, then it's no bother is it.
> 
> Toilets and changing rooms all have cubicles so I don't see the issue there.


Yes, a hospital ward is somewhere I would feel uncomfortable as you are particularly vulnerable.  We were also talking about refuges and women-only rape or DV support groups.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Yes exactly, all men are the same and they are all just waiting for an opportunity to attack women.



This is what I mean by it apes what it opposes. Women just marry for money after all.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

co-op said:


> Or maybe it's not to do with safety at all but just the common problem of people socialised as men hogging the conversation space when it's meant to be a place for women to discuss issues that only arise if you were born with female sexual organs?



Is that what trans women do then? Please tell me of your experiences because I don't automatically assume that's what happens.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Exactly. This is why I loathe this stuff. You can try your hardest, being an egalitarian, and it isn't enough. You're guilty by genetic accident. I know the point they're trying to make, but don't they want to organise with white cis men who aren't dickheads? Turns out they do. But on bizarre terms.


I've no problem with women only spaces tbh. I was just making the point that such restrictions are not necessarily down to looming danger from men, but for many other reasons less ominous (and less likely to get people's backs up).


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Is that what trans women do then? Please tell me of your experiences because I don't automatically assume that's what happens.


Not all men do it either, but men and women are socialised differently from birth and that does result in different patterns of behaviour.  Is it possible to just step out of your socialisation?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> I've no problem with women only spaces tbh. I was just making the point that such restrictions are not necessarily down to looming danger from men, but for many other reasons less ominous (and less likely to get people's backs up).



I don't doubt this. I was just trying to give an example/explanation as as I said upthread not trying to be offensive.

What other reasons do you think?


----------



## spanglechick (May 21, 2015)

I might have been the first to mention transphobia (and certainly I wasn't trying to shut down debate - just that I was upset by what I'd read, didn't have much time, but was keen to post something as a pro-inclusion cis-woman, since until then the only pro-inclusion voices had been male).

The things that seemed transphobic to me were the references to people "deciding" to be a woman - made by a few different posters; the repeated use of "born woman" after the reasons for that language being potentially loaded having been explained; and the idea that trans-women should be denied equal access to crisis services as cis-women, since it seems discriminatory, and I can't see any logically consistent argument for it - though obviously, I'm open to persuasion.  

The use of "cis" by the way, interests me quite a lot.  It's a really neutral, unloaded latin prefix, so i'm not sure why there's a distaste for it. I wonder if it's actually a rebellion against having to add anything at all to cis-gendered people's lifelong experience of being able to call ourselves simply "men" or "women".  We, as people with structural privilege are wont to do, like things the way they were - they were easy for us, and caused us (cis people) no harm.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

I don't find it neutral.  How is cis neutral but born isn't?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Not all men do it either, but men and women are socialised differently from birth and that does result in different patterns of behaviour.  Is it possible to just step out of your socialisation?



I think so yes. Definately once you have matured enough to understand what socialisation is and how we internalise it/act out on it. I often do things that I wasn't socialised to do but wanted to anyway. Some of those things were frowned upon and described as unfeminine/unladylike etc.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> I've no problem with women only spaces tbh. I was just making the point that such restrictions are not necessarily down to looming danger from men, but for many other reasons less ominous (and less likely to get people's backs up).



I don't have a problem with women only spaces (in fact I love them as they tend to dragnet more people into activism). But you'd have a problem with being labelled a racist - and therefore excluded from an anti racist group - because you're white, I assume?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> I don't find it neutral.  How is cis neutral but born isn't?



They are both nuetral descriptors until they are used in a way that assumes power.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I don't have a problem with women only spaces (in fact I love them as they tend to dragnet more people into activism). But you'd have a problem with being labelled a racist - and therefore excluded from an anti racist group - because you're white, I assume?


I wouldn't have a problem with being excluded from a black women's group on the basis that I'm not a black woman.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> They are both nuetral descriptors until they are used in a way that assumes power.


Yes, I dislike cis as it seems to be an expression of the power to redefine what a woman is.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

Fingers said:


> She certainly does not do herself any favours


here is 'cis' used in a non-neutral way. I think for a lot of people on here, this kind of context is the only time they've heard or seen it used.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

Wilf said:


> If we take this out of the realm of principle or theory and discuss it as simple day to day experience, I'd ask these questions: if trans women are included in a women only space, what harm is done? What are the non-trans women stopped from doing?  What solidarity is breached?



If we're discussing it as day-to-day experience, then likely no solidarity is breached, nor harm done.

Unfortunately, the realm of theory is inescapable, if only because it's in the interests of some to always abstract the day-to-day into "what if?". Our "trans-exclusionary feminists" will *always* theorise about how *a* woman might react to another woman who happens to be trans, occupying the same "safe space" as her, and from the foundations of such "what ifs" they've built an entire bloc of ideology attempting to (spuriously, in my opinion) define womanhood through exclusion. That some women, even the majority of women, might not give a rat's arse for "terf" perceived wisdom on the subject, doesn't matter worth a drip of piss to a "terf", because they're zealots, and like all zealots they're locked into a particular ideology that is "the one true ideology".


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> I wouldn't have a problem with being excluded from a black women's group on the basis that I'm not a black woman.


I wouldn't have a problem being excluded from a subset that I wasn't part of either. I'd have a problem being excluded from the entire set, though.


----------



## spanglechick (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> I don't find it neutral.  How is cis neutral but born isn't?


I can only give you the same answer you were given earlier.  Born can feel loaded with "I got here first so I'm more of a woman that you", or alternatively, some transpeople may feel that they were born into their trans gender, just that the physical body didn't align.

Generally, with language, I'm happy to take on board the views of the person experiencing the oppression. Transpeople have said that they can find "born" problematic and cis (as the technical opposite to trans) neutral.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

I once went to my local washing machine repair shop and described the problem. The man there told me he thought it was the 'brushes', got them out from the parts store and described where they were located in the machine. I brought them, went home and changed them which included using shock horror...a screw driver  removing the top of the WM and taking out a part...removing the old brushes, putting the new ones in and then putting the WM as it was. I went back in there a week later to get some new hoses and he remembered me. He asked me how it went. I said fine, your description was great and the WM is working perfectly. He looked at me mouth open and said if I came home and my missus told me she'd just changed the brushes I check her knickers to see if she had a dick. 

True story. Ridiculous but true.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I don't doubt this. I was just trying to give an example/explanation as as I said upthread not trying to be offensive.
> 
> What other reasons do you think?


I mentioned earlier (and someone else has mentioned too) the tendency for men to take over and dominate discussions. This thread has been a fine example of exactly that, for most of it's run (I appreciate the irony of me pointing that out...)


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> I wouldn't have a problem with being excluded from a black women's group on the basis that I'm not a black woman.



Then it logically carries that you'd be happy, as a black woman, being excluded from a whites only group for women.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Not all men do it either, but men and women are socialised differently from birth and that does result in different patterns of behaviour.  Is it possible to just step out of your socialisation?



Do you really believe that the formative social experience of growing up and living as a cis man and growing up and living as a trans woman are broadly the same? Socialisation isn't simply about what you are told you are and should be, but about how you interact with what what you are told and how that in turn shapes what you are told in the future.

I don't even think that you have to subscribe to a particular theory of gender to understand that trans people make up some of the most intensely victimised and oppressed groups in our society. And that this has a role in ongoing socialisation.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> I mentioned earlier (and someone else has mentioned too) the tendency for men to take over and dominate discussions. This thread has been a fine example of exactly that, for most of it's run (I appreciate the irony of me pointing that out...)



You're right on this point.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

I think the reason I find this definition so problematic for women, is that it assumes that gender is this real, objective thing and there is an objectively "woman" way to feel/look/behave.  But for me, gender is a result of being born female and socialised as a woman.  Women vary massively in how they feel/look/behave.  I also think that there is a worrying trend with society becoming more strictly gendered in terms of children's clothes, toys and behaviour and I don't think seeing gender as this strict thing of either being a man or a woman - if you look and behave like a woman you are one - is a forward step.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Then it logically carries that you'd be happy, as a black woman, being excluded from a whites only group for women.


Because black women are well known for oppressing white women?


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Yes, a hospital ward is somewhere I would feel uncomfortable as you are particularly vulnerable.  We were also talking about refuges and women-only rape or DV support groups.


It's difficult


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> I mentioned earlier (and someone else has mentioned too) the tendency for men to take over and dominate discussions. This thread has been a fine example of exactly that, for most of it's run (I appreciate the irony of me pointing that out...)



Yeah, at the same time though, there are many more active male users here day in day out, especially in the politics forum.

As I said before does anyone here have experience of trans women doing this (taking over) in women only spaces? If not I don't know why this is something automatically assumed as a potential problem. Especially since it makes no disctinction between the thoughts and behaviour of a man and those of a trans woman.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I once went to my local washing machine repair shop and described the problem. The man there told me he thought it was the 'brushes', got them out from the parts store and described where they were located in the machine. I brought them, went home and changed them which included using shock horror...a screw driver  removing the top of the WM and taking out a part...removing the old brushes, putting the new ones in and then putting the WM as it was. I went back in there a week later to get some new hoses and he remembered me. He asked me how it went. I said fine, your description was great and the WM is working perfectly. He looked at me mouth open and said if I came home and my missus told me she'd just changed the brushes I check her knickers to see if she had a dick.
> 
> True story. Ridiculous but true.



You'd think if his own wife had a dick he'd have noticed it sooner.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> I think the reason I find this definition so problematic for women, is that it assumes that gender is this real, objective thing and there is an objectively "woman" way to feel/look/behave.  But for me, gender is a result of being born female and socialised as a woman.  Women vary massively in how they feel/look/behave.  I also think that there is a worrying trend with society becoming more strictly gendered in terms of children's clothes, toys and behaviour and I don't think seeing gender as this strict thing of either being a man or a woman - if you look and behave like a woman you are one - is a forward step.


If you disagree with the patriarchal traditional gender roles, why would you seek to exclude those that challenge them?


----------



## spanglechick (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Don't women have good reasons to feel uncomfortable or unsafe in some situations around people who are born and socialised as male?




So - if we take the women's refuge situation - what all women, trans and cis, in that situation, will have in common, is that they have been suffering from domestic abuse.  The physical nature of the transwoman may be male, but women's refuges accept the sons of abused women, some up to age sixteen.  They obviously accept women who may be in excess of six foot, and heavily built, and/or who present in an androgynous style of clothing, manner, voice...  



Thora said:


> But surely that comes from the belief about how gender is defined?  If somewhere is a safe space because it is only accessed by women, then allowing people in who those using it do not believe to be women is what makes it feel unsafe.  So it still comes down to "accept this definition of what it is to be a woman or you are phobic".



There are also people who feel that gay, lesbian and bisexual people should not be allowed to use changing rooms.  As a society we say "sorry, we think you're wrong. accept this about the sanctity of those spaces, or you are phobic."


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Yeah, at the same time though, there are many more active male users here day in day out, especially in the politics forum.


Perhaps. Either way, it wasn't an edifying sight arriving home last night to find this thread full of Thora going round after round with chest-jabbing blokes all telling her what a woman is.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> It's difficult


It is, and I don't think a woman who would feel unsafe or uncomfortable in one of those situations with people born/socialised as male being present are being hysterical, phobic or any of the other things suggested.  Actually I think those accusations are pretty vicious and dismissive of women's experiences.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> If you disagree with the patriarchal traditional gender roles, why would you seek to exclude those that challenge them?


How is changing from one patriarchal traditional gender role to another challenging them?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> here is 'cis' used in a non-neutral way. I think for a lot of people on here, this kind of context is the only time they've heard or seen it used.



That just illustrates her childish combative approach. She is clearly mocking and in doing so undermines the whole point of wanting a 'safer' space.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> You'd think if his own wife had a dick he'd have noticed it sooner.



Well yeah but of course he didn't mean it literally. He was suggesting woman can't/don't do such things. In doing so suggesting I was manly because I could and was happy to.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> How is changing from one patriarchal traditional gender role to another challenging them?


It challenges the concept that gender is fixed and immutable. I've answered your question - please would you answer mine with an answer rather than  another question?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Because black women are well known for oppressing white women?



All peoples oppression are equal, based on skin colour? What about Jewish people, Irish people, etc?


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

. edit: sorry, misread.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> How is changing from one patriarchal traditional gender role to another challenging them?



One might argue that it subverts the gender dichotomy rather than reinforcing it.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> I disagree. I don't think she was being childish or mocking at all.


Why don't you think that?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

Is Mugabe white?


----------



## Nigel Irritable (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> I think the reason I find this definition so problematic for women, is that it assumes that gender is this real, objective thing and there is an objectively "woman" way to feel/look/behave.  But for me, gender is a result of being born female and socialised as a woman.  Women vary massively in how they feel/look/behave.  I also think that there is a worrying trend with society becoming more strictly gendered in terms of children's clothes, toys and behaviour and I don't think seeing gender as this strict thing of either being a man or a woman - if you look and behave like a woman you are one - is a forward step.



The other way of looking at that is that allowing and even encouraging people to reject their assigned gender or even to declare themselves "non-binary" in fact undermines strict assumptions about how natural, intrinsic and immutable gender is. While forbidding them to do so has essentialist consequences. And this is so even where the person rejecting their assigned role uses essentialist arguments to justify that decision and those who seek to limit their ability to reject those roles do so in the name of gender abolition.

Much of the attraction of essentialist arguments for many trans people by the way comes from a need to justify themselves in the face of hostility and rejection. And much of the reason why some trans people tend to adopt very traditional versions of masculinity and femininity stems from medical and political institutions forcing them to do so if they wish to be taken seriously or assisted in any way.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> Why don't you think that?


edited, I thought she was replying to another one of my posts.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> That just illustrates her childish combative approach. She is clearly mocking and in doing so undermines the whole point of wanting a 'safer' space.


it does, but it also illustrates why 'cis' isn't a neutral term.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> It challenges the concept that gender is fixed and immutable. I've answered your question - please would you answer mine with an answer rather than  another question?


OK, I don't think it does challenge gender roles.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> OK, I don't think it does challenge gender roles.


Why not?


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> it does, but it also illustrates why 'cis' isn't a neutral term.


No, it illustrates why the neutrality of terms is contextual.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> Why not?


Because it reinforces that there are two genders, that involve feeling/looking/behaving a certain way, and you are either one or the other.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> No, it illustrates why the neutrality of terms is contextual.


you're right.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> It is, and I don't think a woman who would feel unsafe or uncomfortable in one of those situations with people born/socialised as male being present are being hysterical, phobic or any of the other things suggested.  Actually I think those accusations are pretty vicious and dismissive of women's experiences.



I suppose, we really can't have this conversation properly until we identify what it is exactly that makes some women feel 'unsafe or uncomfortable' when trans women are included in such a way. It seems to me the detail is important...what is it about being socialised/born a man that is imagined/will be acted out by trans women in those situations? 

Again I ask if anyone has any real life experience of anyone doing so.


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I suppose, we really can't have this conversation properly until we identify what it is exactly that makes some women feel 'unsafe or uncomfortable' when trans women are included in such a way. It seems to me the detail is important...what is it about being socialised/born a man that is imagined/will be acted out by trans women in those situations?
> 
> Again I ask if anyone has any real life experience of anyone doing so.


Or, what is it about being trans that makes being born and socialised male irrelevant?


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Because it reinforces that there are two genders, that involve feeling/looking/behaving a certain way, and you are either one or the other.


And yet you seek to reinforce that gender division yourself, by way of born-women only safer spaces. Why is it OK for you, but not OK for trans* people?


----------



## Thora (May 21, 2015)

cesare said:


> And yet you seek to reinforce that gender division yourself, by way of born-women only safer spaces. Why is it OK for you, but not OK for trans* people?


Because born and socialised as a woman actually has some impact on your life experiences.


----------



## stethoscope (May 21, 2015)

Just wanted to say interesting thread, if quite a departure from the OP in urban fashion.

Given that most trans people reflect as many different expressions of gender (and sexuality) as cis people, I'm always a bit bemused so much is made of gender roles/clothing/stereotypes in these things.

On the subject of socialisation. I think most trans people will tell you that they felt incredibly at odds with socialisation (and expectations on them based on their assigned gender/sex) and often feel alienated by it. Clearly this varies from trans person to trans person, however, if we consider that many trans people are now coming out younger and living as the gender they consider themselves to be from pre-teenage, having HRT from mid-late teens, and surgeries by the time they reach adult, the dynamics of socialisation is changing.

These discussions also seem to boil down to 'women's only spaces' - and primarily trans women (as 'really men who just want to be in those spaces because they might have ulterior motives'). Rather than say, because they need the toilet, or they're in hospital because they're ill, or they've been raped. I do of course, accept and appreciate that there are some sensitivities in this. Trans men tend to be treated invisibly (or as 'failed lesbians' by some quarters). Who would believe that something like 5% of the population estimated to be trans could be so evol and intent on both challenging gender or upholding gender at the same time (depending on which side you're on).

As some of you will know, I rather got on my soap box about this stuff a few years back now, and I vowed to never enter such discussion again (and I won't be now either tbh - just wanted to say a few things that were on my mind following this all). Y'know, if people don't accept or regard me as a woman (as someone with differing biology), well, y'know that's upto them. I'm not going to demand anything from those people anymore.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Or, what is it about being trans that makes being born and socialised male irrelevant?



Maybe. Can you answer either question?


----------



## Nigel Irritable (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Or, what is it about being trans that makes being born and socialised male irrelevant?



"Born" is an essentialist way of looking at things. Socialised is a different issue, but what on earth makes you think that the socialisation of cis men and trans women is the same?


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> here is 'cis' used in a non-neutral way. I think for a lot of people on here, this kind of context is the only time they've heard or seen it used.



One thing that does annoy me is people using the term 'cis' as if it's something everyone understands. It has only been around for a few years (in this context at least, it was originally a technical term used in organic chemistry) and is still only used in certain circles. When I see people getting shouted down for innocently asking the meaning of something like that (and I have) that makes me mad. You can't moan about people not understanding stuff if you refuse to tell them about it when they ask, that makes no sense. All it will achieve is perpetuating an us-and-them situation, which sadly a small minority of idiots will always try to do.


----------



## cesare (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Because born and socialised as a woman actually has some impact on your life experiences.


Being born and socialised in a different way actually has some impact on your life experiences.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Or, what is it about being trans that makes being born and socialised male irrelevant?



The fact they found being born and raised male, whilst being trans, difficult?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> I wouldn't have a problem with being excluded from a black women's group on the basis that I'm not a black woman.



But then you're white, which means that your exclusion doesn't carry the same message or value-loading as it would if you were a black woman being excluded from a white women's group. if we forget or ignore the reality that all human social relationships are constructed around asymmetric power-relations between parties, we also lose sight of why our own perceptions of "what is right" are not necessarily accurate or even acceptable.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> One thing that does annoy me is people using the term 'cis' as if it's something everyone understands. It has only been around for a few years (in this context at least, it was originally a technical term used in organic chemistry) and is still only used in certain circles. When I see people getting shouted down for innocently asking the meaning of something like that (and I have) that makes me mad. You can't moan about people not understanding stuff if you refuse to tell them about it when they ask, that makes no sense. All it will achieve is perpetuating an us-and-them situation, which sadly a small minority of idiots will always try to do.



Like what happened to me earlier in the thread.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> The fact they found being born and raised male, whilst being trans, difficult?



There is something in this given that more than one poster has been clear about despite the attempts of society/parents etc to socialise trans people as male/female there exists at the same time a sense of self/of being trans.

As such, I don't feel it is a simple as saying they were born and socialised as male/female etc. That's like saying you were born and socialised as Black/White/Tory/Racist/Lefty etc and saying that those things are 'absolute' experiences, that culture is fixed and immutable, that someone is only the sum of those imposed notions/identifiers.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 21, 2015)

stethoscope totally challenged, changed and informed my views on these issues years ago


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Like what happened to me earlier in the thread.


I thought you were taking the piss. We've been squabbling about this stuff on here for long enough, I feel like I've a intersectional checklist tattooed on my eyelids...


----------



## equationgirl (May 21, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> By women-only spaces are we talking about bogs, changing rooms and hospital wards? Cos I struggle to think of any others.
> 
> Personally I wouldn't have a problem. But I can imagine if I was ill on a hospital ward I might get jumpy sleeping in the same bay as a man (only cos I basically cannot sleep around strange men). If the trans woman was clearly, well, a woman, then it's no bother is it.
> 
> Toilets and changing rooms all have cubicles so I don't see the issue there.


The first time I was admitted to hospital I woke up to find a man in the next bed which had been empty when I went to sleep. I felt incredibly uncomfortable and vulnerable.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Or, what is it about being trans that makes being born and socialised male irrelevant?



Nothing.
However, IMO we need to bear in mind that socialisation is a continuous personal process as well as being a gendering social process in general. Assuming that a trans woman will not have questioned, circumvented or superceded their earlier "programming" ignores the hybridising nature of most cultural and social practices. So nothing is rendered irrelevant, but sometimes progress is made in neutralising the ill-effects of prior conditioning.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> I thought you were taking the piss. We've been squabbling about this stuff on here for long enough, I feel like I've a intersectional checklist tattooed on my eyelids...





Orang was right though. It wasn't unreasonable to think I would have known this sooner. There's loads of stuff on here I miss though. Like the commentariat thread and its predecessor; I give up on the mass chat threads as I can't keep up. They irk me too tbh.


----------



## killer b (May 21, 2015)

I don't think you're supposed to keep up with them, just drop in when you're bored.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 21, 2015)

killer b said:


> I don't think you're supposed to keep up with them, just drop in when you're bored.



But they harvest topics iyswim


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> But they harvest topics iyswim


Yeah I feel the same


----------



## cantsin (May 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Then it logically carries that you'd be happy, as a black woman, being excluded from a whites only group for women.



wtf, you serious ?


----------



## smokedout (May 21, 2015)

Thora said:


> Yes, a hospital ward is somewhere I would feel uncomfortable as you are particularly vulnerable.  We were also talking about refuges and women-only rape or DV support groups.



most refuges do take trans-women, it would be illegal in many cases not to, it does not seem to be causing huge problems in the sector, this s from the guidelines rape crisis scotland put out to single sex services:



> Discrimination against transsexual people is not acceptable and therefore the bar for a
> service provider to discriminate in this way is very high – the use of the exception has to
> be exceptional. Decisions made cannot be based on personal prejudice but on evidence of
> detriment to others, and even then the provider will need to show that a less discriminatory
> ...



you must recognise at least that your views are not the norm amongst women who work in this sector, could be seen as rather old fashioned and eccentric even, and certainly do not imo justify denying dv and rape support services to people who are transsexual.  you are absolutely entitled to those views, but they are out of step with current thinking and practice in the sectors you describe.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 21, 2015)

Wilf said:


> If we take this out of the realm of principle or theory and discuss it as simple day to day experience,


Yeah for me this is the important point. In regard to women/men only spaces then surely the purpose and role of space is a key factor. There's been strong implicit assumption running through the thread that all women only spaces are the same, IMO that just seems daft. 

I think its at best impolite and insensitive and at worst downright dickish not to refer to a transwoman as a woman if they've clearly stated that that's their personnel preference. Likewise the stuff TopCat mentioned earlier about some people blocking a transwoman from using the woman's toilets is just plain bigotry and I'd hope no one would condone it. But it doesn't then follow that there can't be some spaces reserved for cis-women.

For example some time ago someone mentioned a group that was specifically focused on helping women from ethnic minorities who had/were suffered/ing physical or sexual violence. Not because they didn't recognise that other women (or people in general) can suffer from such violence but because there are other cultural issues that meant that it would help BME women to have something more specific to them.


----------



## Wilf (May 21, 2015)

redsquirrel said:


> Yeah for me this is the important point. In regard to women/men only spaces then surely the purpose and role of space is a key factor. There's been strong implicit assumption running through the thread that all women only spaces are the same, IMO that just seems daft.
> 
> I think its at best impolite and insensitive and at worst downright dickish not to refer to a transwoman as a woman if they've clearly stated that that's their personnel preference. Likewise the stuff TopCat mentioned earlier about some people blocking a transwoman from using the woman's toilets is just plain bigotry and I'd hope no one would condone it. But it doesn't then follow that there can't be some spaces reserved for cis-women.
> 
> For example some time ago someone mentioned a group that was specifically focused on helping women from ethnic minorities who had/were suffered/ing physical or sexual violence. Not because they didn't recognise that other women (or people in general) can suffer from such violence but because there are other cultural issues that meant that it would help BME women to have something more specific to them.


 I'm not sure these are strictly comparable.  Needless to say I wouldn't have a problem with ethnic minority women having a specific 'space'  or group (I don't have problems with women only spaces anyway).  But the idea of a 'cis women only space' is different - that would be a majority group - and indeed there might be an argument that their voice is already at the front of the movement.

I can think about this whole thing as an issue of theory, but again, in what way would cis women feel that their discussions, their identities, their politics were compromised by the presence of trans women? It's as Cesare said, this isn't about mutualyl exclusive subsets, it's about the idea of a particular group being excluded from the whole thing.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 22, 2015)

Top posts from spanglechick on this thread.  It's extraordinarily mean to play top trumps over the issue of transgender.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 22, 2015)

Thora said:


> Or, what is it about being trans that makes being born and socialised male irrelevant?


Who are you talking about here? Trans women? They weren't socialised male. Do you not get that? Any trans person across whichever gender endured a socialisation process that _did not work with them_. 

You come across as mean to me on this issue.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 22, 2015)




----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> It challenges the concept that gender is fixed and immutable. I've answered your question - please would you answer mine with an answer rather than  another question?




How does being trans challenge the concept that gender is fixed and immutable? From what I've read on this thread the position seems to be that mtf trans are "women trapped in a man's body" - i.e. their gender was always female (fixed, immutably) but their body was just the wrong one. 

If there's a tension between the biological sex and the gender then the radical solution is to completely deconstruct the gender ideology by transforming society - then no one has to "fit in" with a gender they don't actually feel is true to them (??everyone??). 

The reactionary solution is to say transform the individual to allow society to stay the same. In the old days that meant "shut up and pretend better", nowadays it means "change yourself - but only yourself". (although of course I can see society is changed by the debate about how the changed individual is accepted or not etc - but this is a fundamentally trivial change compared to demolishing gender constructs that limit and damage us all).  

"Change yourself" is just the modernised neo-liberal hyper-individualist version of "pretend better".


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

Thora said:


> Because born and socialised as a woman actually has some impact on your life experiences.


so would you be happy to exclude a born woman socialised as a male from a woman's group, or to include a trans woman socialised as female?


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> How does being trans challenge the concept that gender is fixed and immutable? From what I've read on this thread the position seems to be that mtf trans are "women trapped in a man's body" - i.e. their gender was always female (fixed, immutably) but their body was just the wrong one.
> 
> If there's a tension between the biological sex and the gender then the radical solution is to completely deconstruct the gender ideology by transforming society - then no one has to "fit in" with a gender they don't actually feel is true to them (??everyone??).
> 
> ...



Being clear about your own internal sense of self and identity does not mean that your outward gender - the one that was assigned to you at birth - is fixed and immutable. It can be changed, and that's what some trans* people choose to do. Not all trans* people choose to do this, trans* incorporates a wide range of gender variants including people that choose not to have a gender at all. But it's this challenge to society's perception that once you're assigned your gender at birth, that's it, you're stuck with it, is what some trans* people do by changing their assigned outward gender to their internal one.

I agree that the radical solution is to completely deconstruct gender ideology by transforming society. However I don't think that shoring up gender ideology by constructing narrowly interpreted, anachronistic and patriarchal gender roles within defined spaces, then marginalising and excluding those that don't fit that interpretation is the way to achieve that.


----------



## emanymton (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> How does being trans challenge the concept that gender is fixed and immutable? From what I've read on this thread the position seems to be that mtf trans are "women trapped in a man's body" - i.e. their gender was always female (fixed, immutably) but their body was just the wrong one.
> 
> If there's a tension between the biological sex and the gender then the radical solution is to completely deconstruct the gender ideology by transforming society - then no one has to "fit in" with a gender they don't actually feel is true to them (??everyone??).
> 
> ...


I don't really disagree with that or much of what you have said on this thread. But where we do seem to part ways (and I am sorry if I am misreading you here) is that you seem to be suggesting that trans people are responsible for propagating those reactionary ideas, while I would see them more of the victims* of them. These are people who are told that the way they think and feel is wrong and that the pressure from that is so great that they only way they can begin to feel at peace with themselves is by undergoing extreme and life-altering surgery. In an ideal world they would not feel this pressure, but that is not the world we have. And while we can fight for the world we would like to see people need to survive in the world as it is. I would like to see an end to wage labour but until/if that ever happens I need to continue to sell my labour.


*I imagine some trans people may not be happy being described this way but it is the only way I can think to put it.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

Thora do you quiz people about their socialisation before deciding whether to include them in eg a dv group or do you think you know how they've been socialised depending what they've got between their legs rather than between their ears?


----------



## emanymton (May 22, 2015)

On a separate note someone with more knowledge on the subject might be able to help me out here.

Most of the discussion of trans* people is male to female. Is this because it is more common than female to male and if so why?Or does it just dominate discussion and again if so why?


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 22, 2015)

I think you all should back off Thora a bit here. She's entitled to think and talk about this stuff without people saying oh your so mean to think that, do you _quiz_ victims of domestic violence before offering them help etc

Of course she doesn't. 

The issue of transgender raises lots of complicated stuff. And whilst it's fine to go, be cool, people are different, accept us all how we are... It's also fine to talk about it. Remember women might have different issues of mtf transgender women in toilets/wards etc cos they're scared. Maybe men don't feel that as much with ftm transgender.

I know barely anything about it. Are there roughly equal numbers of mtf and ftm transsexuals? Why is there an asterisk after trans* sometimes? Is there/what is the difference between transsexual/transgender (is that what the * means?). Does cis specifically mean not transgendered or is it more a vague term for 'the norm'?

That woman in the pictures fucking annoying btw. One of those loud middle class feminists that's obsessed with identity politics cos it's all about her.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Thora's entitled to her own opinions, but if she chooses to talk about them we're equally entitled to challenge them.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> I think you all should back off Thora a bit here. She's entitled to think and talk about this stuff without people saying oh your so mean to think that, do you _quiz_ victims of domestic violence before offering them help etc
> 
> Of course she doesn't.
> 
> ...


yeh. of course she doesn't. my point exactly.


----------



## Red Cat (May 22, 2015)

I haven't got time to post anything more considered but I think the discussion is a bit limited if we talk about socialisation as a one way type of conditioning process rather than something that involves an identification with (a feeling of sameness with) parents or other important adults i.e I think it's not just a doing to, from adult to child, but a taking in from adult by child.


----------



## The39thStep (May 22, 2015)

What's the policy at Clapton Football Club?


----------



## BigTom (May 22, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Does cis specifically mean not transgendered or is it more a vague term for 'the norm'?



cis is simply an antonym for trans. If we're going to have a word for people who have/are/want to transition, then we should also have a word for people who don't. I think Smokedout put it really well earlier in the thread:



smokedout said:


> It's just an atonym, like straight is to gay, or non-disabled is to disabled. Its difficult to discuss things like disability or transgenderism without a term to refer to people who are not transgendered or disabled, and as was hilariously pointed out earlier in the thread, without a specific antonym then there is a temptation to use the word 'normal' which is obviously a bit shit.



edit: cis is a latin word, in latin it's the antonym for trans. It's been used in chemistry historically so I've learnt on this thread, seems like a wanky academic made up word but actually it's got a certain rightness to it, being derived from language rather than anything gender/sex/biologically based. I really like it as a word for this usage.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

The39thStep said:


> What's the policy at Clapton Football Club?


i don't believe the club itself has a policy but i understand that among some fans there's a framework about this, a scaffold if you will


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> Thora's entitled to her own opinions, but if she chooses to talk about them we're equally entitled to challenge them.


must say Thora's rsther surprised me: when i knew her some years ago she gave me the impression of being more open-minded, fwoabt


----------



## seventh bullet (May 22, 2015)

BigTom said:


> cis is simply an antonym for trans. If we're going to have a word for people who have/are/want to transition, then we should also have a word for people who don't. I think Smokedout put it really well earlier in the thread:
> 
> 
> 
> edit: cis is a latin word, in latin it's the antonym for trans. It's been used in chemistry historically so I've learnt on this thread, seems like a wanky academic made up word but actually it's got a certain rightness to it, being derived from language rather than anything gender/sex/biologically based. I really like it as a word for this usage.



I doubt I'll come across anyone in my day to day life who uses it.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> must say Thora's rsther surprised me: when i knew her some years ago she gave me the impression of being more open-minded, fwoabt


I just had to google fwoabt


----------



## BigTom (May 22, 2015)

seventh bullet said:


> I doubt I'll come across anyone in my day to day life who uses it.



of course, like somkedout said it's a word that's needed for discussion about transgenderism, not for everyday conversation. It's also a very new word in this context, only been in the last 3-4 years I think, so most people have never heard of it, so even in a conversation about transgenderism it may not crop up. I bet there was also a time when the word straight would not have been heard outside of a few small lgb connected circles (I actually have no idea about the origins of the word straight in that context), but that's not the case now.


----------



## cantsin (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> I just had to google fwoabt



cldnt find it, and already driving me slightly mad , " from what --- about that "??

Plse enlighten


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

cantsin said:


> cldnt find it, and already driving me slightly mad , " from what --- about that "??
> 
> Plse enlighten


I *think* it's For Want Of A Better Word. Pickman's model is that right?


----------



## cantsin (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> I *think* it's For Want Of A Better Word. Pickman's model is that right?



sounds right, ta


----------



## Maurice Picarda (May 22, 2015)

better term, surely.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> better term, surely.


Ah yes, that'll explain the t at the end rather than my w


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

BigTom said:


> cis is simply an antonym for trans. If we're going to have a word for people who have/are/want to transition, then we should also have a word for people who don't. I think Smokedout put it really well earlier in the thread:
> 
> 
> 
> edit: cis is a latin word, in latin it's the antonym for trans. It's been used in chemistry historically so I've learnt on this thread, seems like a wanky academic made up word but actually it's got a certain rightness to it, being derived from language rather than anything gender/sex/biologically based. I really like it as a word for this usage.


While it's always useful to appreciate the etymology, I'm not at all convinced about the usefulness or need of the prefix beyond the minority that perceive themselves to be 'othered'. Just because a term operates as an antonym does not necessarily give it 'coinage' amongst the population outside of the minority. For one thing it appears to suffer from the same weakness that antagonises some described as atheists; the word defines people on a parameter selected as important to one group, but not the other.

It is always helpful to know how and why a term has evolved, but I would be surprised to hear non-trans people use the term 'cis' to describe their gender status.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> I *think* it's For Want Of A Better Word. Pickman's model is that right?


for want of a better term. word traditionally doesn't start with t, cesare.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> While it's always useful to appreciate the etymology, I'm not at all convinced about the usefulness or need of the prefix beyond the minority that perceive themselves to be 'othered'. Just because a term operates as an antonym does not necessarily give it 'coinage' amongst the population outside of the minority. For one thing it appears to suffer from the same weakness that antagonises some described as atheists; the word defines people on a parameter selected as important to one group, but not the other.
> 
> It is always helpful to know how and why a term has evolved, but I would be surprised to hear non-trans people use the term to 'cis' to describe their gender status.


It'll probably catch on eventually. I didn't use to describe myself as straight either but now I don't think twice about it.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> for want of a better term. word traditionally doesn't start with t, cesare.


#981


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> #981


yeh but i check my alerts before i check the thread. i'll have to revise my sop i suppose.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but i check my alerts before i check the thread. i'll have to revise my sop i suppose.


Standard Operating Procedure? Indeed, if you don't want to miss a trick


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> Standard Operating Procedure? Indeed, if you don't want to miss a trick


i do not want to miss a terribly risque internet chat (i know you added the k as an 'omage).


----------



## J Ed (May 22, 2015)

The39thStep said:


> What's the policy at Clapton Football Club?



Call the police and get them to sort it out


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Call the police and get them to sort it out


giving na a new meaning


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> It'll probably catch on eventually. I didn't use to describe myself as straight either but now I don't think twice about it.


You may be right, and I'm fully aware that I may be struggling with some latent reactionary aversion to the term, but I have to say that I am personally very averse to self-describing by my sexuality, gender or sexual proclivity. If asked directly (for good reason) I would know that I was 'straight' or 'cis' or even 'vestite', but I would feel as uneasy self-describing in these terms as I would calling myself an atheist. These descriptors accord an importance to the particular criteria chosen that I don't share.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> It'll probably catch on eventually. I didn't use to describe myself as straight either but now I don't think twice about it.


do you think about it at all?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> I would know that I was 'straight' or 'cis' or even '*vestite*',


you're not a naturist then.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

I cant continue to argue this - i felt dysphoria kicking in yesterday and if i keep discussi bc this ill end up suicidal again like i did over xmas. 

But just to wrap up my viewpoint. It seems to me that trans women, who are women, are excluded from some spaces because a small number of feminists  consider is still to be men and that our continued existence and our self identification as women is an affront to their theoretical view of what gender is.

And so we are excluded by cis men and by cis women. 

There are more than one theories on gender and i just ask for tolerance and inclusion instead of hatred and exclusion. 

Why cant the TEs accept that most other people dont agree with them?

Im lucky - all the cis women in my life have accepted me as a woman and i am involved in a few womens groups now. 

It helps that i look female. But not every trans woman is so fortunate.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 22, 2015)

FWIW, I don't think name calling (_mean/closed minded_) is helpful and will probably do more to derail the discussion than anything else. 

What is clear from the conversation is that some of the opinions that are being discussed haven't been formed through actual experience. As such, much of this discussion is a theoretical/exploratory one. Whilst you could argue that there is a lack of understanding I really don't think anyone is trying to be mean spirited or malevolent.


----------



## smokedout (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> For one thing it appears to suffer from the same weakness that antagonises some described as atheists; the word defines people on a parameter selected as important to one group, but not the other.



are you comparing transsexuality to a religion?


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

smokedout said:


> are you comparing transsexuality to a religion?


No


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> FWIW, I don't think name calling (_mean/closed minded_) is helpful and will probably do more to derail the discussion than anything else.
> 
> What is clear from the conversation is that some of the opinions that are being discussed haven't been formed through actual experience. As such, much of this discussion is a theoretical/exploratory one. Whilst you could argue that there is a lack of understanding I really don't think anyone is trying to be mean spirited or malevolent.


I havent name called anyone


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> do you think about it at all?


Yes


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> Yes


but just the once


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I havent name called anyone


it's early days yet


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I havent name called anyone



I know you haven't. Maybe i should have quoted those that did to avoid any confusion.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> but just the once


No; more than that but not twice.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I know you haven't. Maybe i should have quoted those that did to avoid any confusion.


It's only littlebabyjesus that called Thora mean so more direct criticism from both you and Nancy_Winks will help avoid confusion, I agree.


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> FWIW, I don't think name calling (_mean/closed minded_) is helpful and will probably do more to derail the discussion than anything else.
> 
> What is clear from the conversation is that some of the opinions that are being discussed haven't been formed through actual experience. As such, much of this discussion is a theoretical/exploratory one. Whilst you could argue that there is a lack of understanding I really don't think anyone is trying to be mean spirited or malevolent.


Speaking theoretically, I can't imagine that many trans people would expect/desire the absurd proposition that others would self-describe using the antonym of their gender status. I fully agree, that for the basis of mutual understanding, that it useful for the wider population to appreciate what the prefix means, but its effective use appears most likely within and between the trans population.


----------



## joustmaster (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> While it's always useful to appreciate the etymology, I'm not at all convinced about the usefulness or need of the prefix beyond the minority that perceive themselves to be 'othered'. Just because a term operates as an antonym does not necessarily give it 'coinage' amongst the population outside of the minority. For one thing it appears to suffer from the same weakness that antagonises some described as atheists; the word defines people on a parameter selected as important to one group, but not the other.
> 
> It is always helpful to know how and why a term has evolved, but I would be surprised to hear non-trans people use the term 'cis' to describe their gender status.



I was in a twiggy real ale sort of bar at the weekend, and a man used the word cis in conversation, with me. So its being used.
There no trans people there. Just bearded (cis)men drink real ale and talking about computer servers.
It wasn't the most rock and roll weekend I've ever had.

Out of interest - If you were with your mates, and you had a conversation about trans people, what term would you use to describe people who weren't trans?


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> it's early days yet


No i had my heated moment yesterday and i kept it together


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Speaking theoretically, I can't imagine that many trans people would expect/desire the absurd proposition that others would self-describe using the antonym of their gender status. I fully agree, that for the basis of mutual understanding, that it useful for the wider population to appreciate what the prefix means, but its effective use appears most likely within and between the trans population.


Cis people in my circles regularly use the term. And not just when im around. 

Similarly i refer to myself as straight and heterosexual even when there arent gay people present. 

Just because were a minority it doesnt mean you can get away with disregarding us im afraid!


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> Out of interest - If you were with your mates, and you had a conversation about trans people, what term would you use to describe people who weren't trans?



People.


----------



## joustmaster (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> People.


you would call a trans person a trans person, and you'd call a cis person just a person?


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> People.


And that is how trans people become non people


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> People.


Youre actually taking the UKIP line on this. Just saying.


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Cis people in my circles regularly use the term. And not just when im around.
> 
> Similarly i refer to myself as straight and heterosexual even when there arent gay people present.
> 
> Just because were a minority it doesnt mean you can get away with disregarding us im afraid!


If people want to self-describe in that way...fine.

But anyone not particularly wanting to self-describe on the basis of gender/sexuality is also fine...and doesn't necessarily imply any deliberate disregard.


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Youre actually taking the UKIP line on this. Just saying.


May be so, but it happens to be my preferred 'line' personally.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> . . These descriptors accord an importance to the particular criteria chosen that I don't share.


Which is cis and heterosexual privilege

I wish i didnt have to think about gender or sexuality but its been a bit in my face all my life!! Not helped by the fact that many people who usually believe in human rights dont appear to give a shit about trans, or are against our very existence. This is not a time to be sitting on the fence.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> If people want to self-describe in that way...fine.
> 
> But anyone not particularly wanting to self-describe on the basis of gender/sexuality is also fine...and doesn't necessarily imply any deliberate disregard.


I feel very strongly that youre missing the point here.


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> And that is how trans people become non people


I can see that. But tbf I was asked specifically about non-trans people. Had I been asked about how I might describe trans people I would have offered the same answer. FWIW.


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I feel very strongly that youre missing the point here.


go on...


----------



## joustmaster (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> I can see that. But tbf I was asked specifically about non-trans people. Had I been asked about how I might describe trans people I would have offered the same answer. FWIW.


the question I asked was about an imaginary conversation about trans people and the terms you would use.
you are saying that in such a conversation, you would use the same word to describe both groups?

sounds like back pedaling, to me..


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> go on...



Your implication being that somehow this is my fault?


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Your implication being that somehow this is my fault?


No fault implied...I just hoped you'd help me see in what way I've missed the point. Genuinely wanted to know...that's all.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> I can see that. But tbf I was asked specifically about non-trans people. Had I been asked about how I might describe trans people I would have offered the same answer. FWIW.


How does referring to trans people as people in any way convey our transness?

I see comprehension issues here.

Lets try another one - how do you describe women when youre specifically talking about women?


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> No fault implied...I just hoped you'd help me see in what way I've missed the point. Genuinely wanted to know...that's all.


Im trying really hard already


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> How does referring to trans people as people in any way convey our transness?
> 
> I see comprehension issues here.
> 
> Lets try another one - how do you describe women when youre specifically talking about women?


I don't think it does, but that presupposes that I might have wanted to draw such a distinction. If I were specifically seeking to refer to a gender group I would, of course, use the term women or trans or whatever.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> I don't think it does, but that presupposes that I might have wanted to draw such a distinction. If I were specifically seeking to refer to a gender group I would, of course, use the term women or trans or whatever.


 and thats where the discrimination come in - you refer to cis women as women but trans women as trans women implying were not real women - thats my point!!


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> and thats where the discrimination come in - you refer to cis women as women but trans women as trans women implying were not real women - thats my point!!


Well, cast like that I feel bad...that was not my intention at all. Personally I'd feel happier describing (if I had to) people who self-describe as women as....women. But tbh this sort of issue does seem to be a strong argument for the default of regarding your fellow man as 'people'.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 22, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> the question I asked was about an imaginary conversation about trans people and the terms you would use.
> you are saying that in such a conversation, you would use the same word to describe both groups?
> 
> sounds like back pedaling, to me..



You do realise that people can discussing folk without shoehorning everyone into a fucking box? 

I remember an old house mate of mine who referred to her black friend and her lesbian friend. Why not just use their names? It struck me as ultra weird.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Well, cast like that I feel bad...that was not my intention at all. Personally I'd feel happier describing (if I had to) people who self-describe as women as....women. But tbh this sort of issue does seem to be a strong argument for the default of regarding your fellow man as 'people'.


I agree with your sentiments but we're not there yet!! Trans people need to be recognised as equal and accepted as just people before we can move to the next step.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 22, 2015)

What are TEs?


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> What are TEs?


Just shorthand for trans exclusionaries


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

I feel bad about derailing this thread


----------



## killer b (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I feel bad about derailing this thread


Don't, it was pretty worthless before the various derails. This is a discussion worth having (I appreciate it's one you've had many times and are probably sick of by now, mind...)


----------



## DotCommunist (May 22, 2015)

don't,this debate is far more informative than talking about some goldsmith twonk chatting shit


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

emanymton said:


> I don't really disagree with that or much of what you have said on this thread. But where we do seem to part ways (and I am sorry if I am misreading you here) is that you seem to be suggesting that trans people are responsible for propagating those reactionary ideas, while I would see them more of the victims* of them. .



I've tried to make the point "some trans activists" "some ideology from trans people" etc - clearly it's a spectrum of opinions on all sides but it's a bulletin board and I'm posting without great amounts of time to tread ultra cautiously at every step. It makes it a difficult subject to discuss because there's insult-fishing going on.


----------



## prunus (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I feel bad about derailing this thread



No, don't; this debate is much more important, and interesting, than the original one.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 22, 2015)

jinx


----------



## prunus (May 22, 2015)

Indeed


----------



## smokedout (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I feel bad about derailing this thread



I wouldn't, about the only person you pissed off is probably Rod Liddle


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

killer b said:


> Don't, it was pretty worthless before the various derails. This is a discussion worth having (I appreciate it's one you've had many times and are probably sick of by now, mind...)


A bit yeah, but if I can help one person understand a bit better - or show that not all trans people are shouty and angry then its worth it.


----------



## killer b (May 22, 2015)

smokedout said:


> I wouldn't, about the only person you pissed off is probably Rod Liddle


You kidding? We've written his next column already.


----------



## joustmaster (May 22, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> You do realise that people can discussing folk without shoehorning everyone into a fucking box?
> 
> I remember an old house mate of mine who referred to her black friend and her lesbian friend. Why not just use their names? It struck me as ultra weird.


I entirely agree.
But what I was asking was which terms would brogdale would use in a conversation about gender. So, erm, you'd need to use gender terms, in this instance.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 22, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> I entirely agree.
> But what I was asking was which terms would brogdale would use in a conversation about gender. So, erm, you'd need to use gender terms, in this instance.



Male or female.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> No i had my heated moment yesterday and i kept it together


oh well  there's always next time


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I agree with your sentiments but we're not there yet!! Trans people need to be recognised as equal and accepted as just people before we can move to the next step.


Absolutely, but in seeking to call people just that, I genuinely thought that I was recognising equality and accepting folk on their self-description. That said, it concerns me that expressing that view may be interpreted as one of privilege, or just downright reactionary. That's what I was struggling with.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Male or female.


that seems a bit binary to me


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> Out of interest - If you were with your mates, and you had a conversation about trans people, what term would you use to describe people who weren't trans?



You seemed a little dissatisfied with my response when I said "people". tbf you had used that very descriptor yourself in the question. What, in your opinion, should I have said?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> that seems a bit binary to me



I always thought that if someone came out as identifying as a gender then you refer to them as such. So if someone identifies as female I would refer to them as such. Are you saying this is now wrong and it always requires a trans or cis prefix?


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I always thought that if someone came out as identifying as a gender then you refer to them as such. So if someone identifies as female I would refer to them as such. Are you saying this is now wrong and it always requires a trans or cis prefix?


not at all - but you can't ignore the prefix as there will be times that you may specifically need to refer to trans or cis. I thought I'd explained this tbh.

But my point is not everyone identifies as male or female. I know a few people that don't - so its a wrong assumption.


----------



## joustmaster (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> You seemed a little dissatisfied with my response when I said "people". tbf you had used that very descriptor yourself in the question. What, in your opinion, should I have said?



It was a genuine question. 

You had said that you couldn't see yourself really needing to use the word cis/that only trans people would use it.
So I asked if, amongst friends, you had a conversation about trans and cis people, what words you would have used instead of cis.
There are a lot of other choices. A long time a go, as a youth, I might have used the word trans and normal. Which is horrible.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

I thought I'd share this thing I wrote a while ago for a public speech I was going to make. It's a draft version so a bit rough and ready. It's kind of in answer to a question i saw earlier in the thread about when gender mismatch becomes a dysfunction.



> From the age I was first aware of gender I’ve struggled.
> 
> My earliest memory of trans expression was when I was about 6 and I asked my mum if I could go to school dressed like my sister. And I know that I’d been aware of my difference a long time before that.
> 
> ...


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> It was a genuine question.
> 
> You had said that you couldn't see yourself really needing to use the word cis/that only trans people would use it.
> So I asked if, amongst friends, you had a conversation about trans and cis people, what words you would have used instead of cis.
> There are a lot of other choices. A long time a go, as a youth, I might have used the word trans and normal. Which is horrible.


Oh, OK...that sounds very reasonable. Yeah, I suppose in such an hypothetical context I might find myself needing to use the prefix as you say, but my gut reaction would not be to naturally gravitate to the antonym usage. There are people, and some people have transitioned (making them trans)...but they are, first and foremost people. And I can well appreciate how it might well be important for trans people to have the vocabulary in their own conversations to distinguish people who are not trans, but like I said I can't see the need for wide-spread adoption of the term as a self-descriptor for most people.


----------



## prunus (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I thought I'd share this thing I wrote a while ago for a public speech I was going to make. It's a draft version so a bit rough and ready. It's kind of in answer to a question i saw earlier in the thread about when gender mismatch becomes a dysfunction.



Thank you so much for posting that. Very moving, one of the most beautiful things I've read. Thank you.


----------



## emanymton (May 22, 2015)

Stupid question but what is wrong with trans and not-trans. Which is what I would have used before I heard the word cis.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

emanymton said:


> Stupid question but what is wrong with trans and not-trans. Which is what I would have used before I heard the word cis.


why say non trans when we have cis? 


also - non trans doesn't cut it - there are many different genders that do not identify as cis or trans. 'Non trans' denies their existence!


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> but like I said I can't see the need for wide-spread adoption of the term as a self-descriptor for most people.


I can - it needs to be in everybody's vocabulary or we will be subject to discrimination through ignorance. I live in the real world and interact with all sorts of people, not just trans people!


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> also - non trans doesn't cut it - there are many different genders that do not identify as cis or trans. 'Non trans' denies their existence!



But surely 'cis' is just a word that means 'non trans' 

Or if it's not, what does 'cis' actually mean?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> But surely 'cis' is just a word that means 'non trans'
> 
> Or if it's not, what does 'cis' actually mean?



Someone who identifies with their gender from birth.


----------



## Wilf (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I thought I'd share this thing I wrote a while ago for a public speech I was going to make. It's a draft version so a bit rough and ready. It's kind of in answer to a question i saw earlier in the thread about when gender mismatch becomes a dysfunction.


That's really sad and uplifting at the same time, thanks for posting it AS.  Anyway, scuse me, I've just got something in me eye.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

*cis-, prefix*

repr. Latin _cis_ prep. ‘on this side of’, opposed to _trans_ or _ultra_, across, beyond; also used in comb. as in _cis-alpīnus_, _cis-montānus_, lying on this side the Alps or the mountains, _cis-rhenānus_ on this side the Rhine, _cis-tiberis_ on this side the Tiber. The two first of these esp. continued in use in medieval Latin in reference to Rome and Italy, whence Italian _cisalpino_, French _cisalpin_, _cismontain_, cisalpine adj., cismontane adj.


----------



## 8ball (May 22, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Someone who identifies with their gender from birth.


 
And 'trans' means someone identifies with the opposite gender.

Other conformations are possible.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 22, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Someone who identifies with their gender from birth.



I get that, I don't get how that's different from 'not-trans'.

Not that I think people shouldn't use these words, but I've always seen cis/trans used as a mutually exclusive dichotomy iyswim.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Someone who identifies with their gender from birth.


so someone who's trans and identifies as such from their earliest years would be cis trans. whereas someone who only identifies as trans later in life would be trans.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> *cis-, prefix*
> 
> repr. Latin _cis_ prep. ‘on this side of’, opposed to _trans_ or _ultra_, across, beyond; also used in comb. as in _cis-alpīnus_, _cis-montānus_, lying on this side the Alps or the mountains, _cis-rhenānus_ on this side the Rhine, _cis-tiberis_ on this side the Tiber. The two first of these esp. continued in use in medieval Latin in reference to Rome and Italy, whence Italian _cisalpino_, French _cisalpin_, _cismontain_, cisalpine adj., cismontane adj.



I was asking about what it means _in this context _as I suspect you probably know.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I was asking about what it means _in this context _as I suspect you probably know.


i just read your posts, not your mind.


----------



## smokedout (May 22, 2015)

and another thing, gay used to mean happy, and full of life and now perverts have stolen it

(bit much perhaps but I keep seeing parallels to a lot of things that were said in the past about gay and lesbian people)


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

smokedout said:


> and another thing, gay used to mean happy, and full of life and then it meant homosexual and now perverts have stolen it


c4u


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Someone who identifies with their gender from birth.


Someone who identifies with their *assigned* gender from birth would be more accurate


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Someone who identifies with their *assigned* gender from birth would be more accurate


you're confusing 'gender' and 'sex'.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I was asking about what it means _in this context _as I suspect you probably know.


the same...


----------



## killer b (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> why say non trans when we have cis?
> 
> 
> also - non trans doesn't cut it - there are many different genders that do not identify as cis or trans. 'Non trans' denies their existence!


so does 'cis', then?

edit: actually, ignore me. I get you now. it doesn't deny their existence though, just includes them among 'not trans'.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i just read your posts, not your mind.



And yet everyone else knew what I was getting at. Maybe you're just not paying attention because you're too busy planning your next incredibly witty interjection of facetiousness and pedantry.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you're confusing 'gender' and 'sex'.


its only in recent years that people have started differentiating gender and sex. When I was born female meant girl meant vagina. end of!!

And the vast majority of people still do equate female gender with female sex. When you're assigned female at birth it is your sex and your gender that is defined for you by society.

Now we're beginning to know better. And I'm sure current conventions will be seen as outdated before long.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> But surely 'cis' is just a word that means 'non trans'


which is what it's been taken as meaning throughout the thread. and that's effectively what people have taken it as meaning in this context.





> Or if it's not, what does 'cis' actually mean?


what does it mean? to put you out of your misery i quoted from the oed.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> And yet everyone else knew what I was getting at. Maybe you're just not paying attention because you're too busy planning your next incredibly witty interjection of facetiousness and pedantry.


do you read your posts or consider their meaning at all? it doesn't seem so.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> which is what it's been taken as meaning throughout the thread. and that's effectively what people have taken it as meaning in this context.



Well yes, so you understand my confusion upon learning that 'cis' and 'non trans' are not synonymous, even though I've only ever seen the word used as such.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Well yes, so you understand my confusion upon learning that 'cis' and 'non trans' are not synonymous, even though I've only ever seen the word used as such.


yes. now we've cleared that up, i'll take your post in the apologetick way it was intended and i hope we can move on.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

killer b said:


> so does 'cis', then?
> 
> edit: actually, ignore me. I get you now. it doesn't deny their existence though, just includes them among 'not trans'.


no

if you use non trans to say cis people you're identifying non binary (for eaxample) people as cis. 

if you use cis then non binary people aren't defined at all - they are seperate and exist outside of both trans and cis.


----------



## 8ball (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Well yes, so you understand my confusion upon learning that 'cis' and 'non trans' are not synonymous, even though I've only ever seen the word used as such.


 
They're not quite synonymous in the way 'gay' and 'not heterosexual' aren't.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> And yet everyone else knew what I was getting at..



Did you ask us, cos I didn't.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 22, 2015)

[


Pickman's model said:


> yes. now we've cleared that up, i'll take your post in the apologetick way it was intended and i hope we can move on.



I wasn't intending to be apologetic, I still think you're a pompous arse.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> [
> 
> 
> I wasn't intending to be apologetic, I still think you're a pompous arse.


yeh. well, your opinion of me is rather higher than my opinion of you.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. well, your opinion of me is rather higher than my opinion of you.



That's pomposity for you I'm afraid.


----------



## Mation (May 22, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I'm not a dualist, I'm a materialist. However considering brains in isolation tells us very little. We exist in relationships, can only exist in relationships. Reducing things to their fundamental parts only gets us so far. We have to reintroduce a holistic understanding at some point.


I'm not suggesting we should consider brains in isolation. They exist in the world, so we should also look at the world. But your assertion below is untrue.


Blagsta said:


> The idea that brain structures determine behaviour is quite outdated.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> That's pomposity for you I'm afraid.


tbh i'm perfectly happy being a pompous arse iyo as it is rather better than being someone like you who can't express themselves sufficiently, and then says - with nary a quarter of an hour's interlude - that "everyone else" understood what they meant, when fuck all people have seen the pisspoor post in question. equally, i voiced no opinion of you as a person until you descended to ad hominem and rather dull insults. why not see if you can raise your game? it'd be fun to see you try anyway.


----------



## killer b (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> no
> 
> if you use non trans to say cis people you're identifying non binary (for eaxample) people as cis.
> 
> if you use cis then non binary people aren't defined at all - they are seperate and exist outside of both trans and cis.


If you're using 'non trans' to say 'people who aren't trans', then people who aren't trans or cis are included within the 'non trans' bit. I'd imagine in most cases this would be ok wouldn't it? If you're discussing the particular challenges faced by trans people anyway. Of course people who're neither would have their own (possibly related) challenges, but they aren't excluded in this context - we just aren't talking about them.


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I can - it needs to be in everybody's vocabulary or we will be subject to discrimination through ignorance. I live in the real world and interact with all sorts of people, not just trans people!


Yes, but there's a difference between having the term as part of your informed vocabulary and habitually adopting it as self-descriptor.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Yes, but there's a difference between having the term as part of your informed vocabulary and habitually adopting it as self-descriptor.


yes there is i agree. It needs to be used when appropriate.


----------



## likesfish (May 22, 2015)

So if your not trans or male or female what are you?

If the answer involves otherkin etc my response may include fire


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

killer b said:


> If you're using 'non trans' to say 'people who aren't trans', then people who aren't trans or cis are included within the 'non trans' bit. I'd imagine in most cases this would be ok wouldn't it? If you're discussing the particular challenges faced by trans people anyway. Of course people who're neither would have their own (possibly related) challenges, but they aren't excluded in this context - we just aren't talking about them.



Non trans and trans allows for two main classes of gender identity and cis and trans allows for infinite. Also cis is shorter than non trans and less likely to lead to trans people being defined by their transness. I just don't understand why you'd want to use non-trans to say cis. Like saying non-gay to say straight. Weird!


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

likesfish said:


> So if your not trans or male or female what are you?
> 
> If the answer involves otherkin etc my response may include fire



firstly trans is not a gender. it is not like being male or female. It is how you relate to being male or female.

secondly, there are plenty of people who do not feel male or female: non-binary, gender fluid, gender queer, etc. 
If you want to know more you'd be better off using google as I can't speak for those people, but i do respect their personal identity.


----------



## brogdale (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> yes there is i agree. It needs to be used when appropriate.


I think that's right. Not that I'm suggesting that this is the case, but...there's always the danger of actually alienating less well-informed sections of society if the first they hear of a term is that it is being applied to them as a prefix descriptor. People who might well be positively disposed to equality etc. might be unsettled to be described by an antonym of the sub-set for whom consciousness-raising is important.


----------



## killer b (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Non trans and trans allows for two main classes of gender identity and cis and trans allows for infinite. Also cis is shorter than non trans and less likely to lead to trans people being defined by their transness. I just don't understand why you'd want to use non-trans to say cis. Like saying non-gay to say straight. Weird!


Well, in order to make yourself understood I suppose. I've never seen or heard the word 'cis' used outside of here and twittersectionalist blogs. I think most people would need me to explain what I meant before I could use it in conversation. Which - as we can see from this thread - could open a whole new can of worms...


----------



## Blagsta (May 22, 2015)

Libcom are posting in support of Bahar on their Facebook feed.


----------



## Blagsta (May 22, 2015)

Mation said:


> I'm not suggesting we should consider brains in isolation. They exist in the world, so we should also look at the world. But your assertion below is untrue.



Is it?


----------



## joustmaster (May 22, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Libcom are posting in support of Bahar on their Facebook feed.


stop derailing the thread


----------



## likesfish (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> firstly trans is not a gender. it is not like being male or female. It is how you relate to being male or female.
> 
> secondly, there are plenty of people who do not feel male or female: non-binary, gender fluid, gender queer, etc.
> If you want to know more you'd be better off using google as I can't speak for those people, but i do respect their personal identity.



Fair one rather confusing but makes some sense I'll put the matches away.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

killer b said:


> could open a whole new can of worms...



I find opening cans of worms to be very useful


----------



## killer b (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I find opening cans of worms to be very useful


I'm quite happy to thrash these things out on Urban - elsewhere, I think it's easy to alienate and put people off by using what can be seen as jargon. Why spend half an hour explaining the nuance of an unfamiliar word to someone and have them probably think I'm some kind of uptight PC dick when I can just talk about 'people who aren't trans' and in 99.9% of cases be completely understood and inclusive?


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I thought I'd share this thing I wrote a while ago for a public speech I was going to make. It's a draft version so a bit rough and ready. It's kind of in answer to a question i saw earlier in the thread about when gender mismatch becomes a dysfunction.


Thanks for posting that. It's very moving and articulate. I wish you well, and I wish that you're treated with respect as the woman you are xx


----------



## Orang Utan (May 22, 2015)

smokedout said:


> I wouldn't, about the only person you pissed off is probably Rod Liddle


Can you C&P the column please? It   let me read it!


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

killer b said:


> I'm quite happy to thrash these things out on Urban - elsewhere, I think it's easy to alienate and put people off by using what can be seen as jargon. Why spend half an hour explaining the nuance of an unfamiliar word to someone and have them probably think I'm some kind of uptight PC dick when I can just talk about 'people who aren't trans' and in 99.9% of cases be completely understood and inclusive?


I've got explaining "cis" down to a fine art in conversation, but I admit it can come across the way you describe if not careful.



Nancy_Winks said:


> Thanks for posting that. It's very moving and articulate. I wish you well, and I wish that you're treated with respect as the woman you are xx


Thanks


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh i'm perfectly happy being a pompous arse iyo as it is rather better than being someone like you who can't express themselves sufficiently, and then says - with nary a quarter of an hour's interlude - that "everyone else" understood what they meant, when fuck all people have seen the pisspoor post in question. equally, i voiced no opinion of you as a person until you descended to ad hominem and rather dull insults. why not see if you can raise your game? it'd be fun to see you try anyway.



This is one of those rare threads where it seems like people are actually learning stuff. When you chip in with a sarcastic dictionary quote in response to a genuine question, that's the sort of thing that makes people not want to bother asking questions. If people don't ask questions they don't learn. 

If you really think your contribution was helpful and appropriate then fair enough, but I think we both know you can do better.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> This is one of those rare threads where it seems like people are actually learning stuff. When you chip in with a sarcastic dictionary quote in response to a genuine question, that's the sort of thing that makes people not want to bother asking questions. If people don't ask questions they don't learn.


YOU asked a question. i answered factually, without sarcasm, without putting you down. yet you then decided to start putting ME down for a fucking crime which only exists in your head. now fuck off.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 22, 2015)

I don't even mind sarcastic bullshit posts tbh, I just prefer it when they're actually funny.


----------



## Nice one (May 22, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Libcom are posting in support of Bahar on their Facebook feed.





Why doesn't this surprise me. 2 years from defending witty (read: posh boy ironic) racist comments about black vaginas to this. 

The privileged middle class will always know which side to fall back on.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I don't even mind sarcastic bullshit posts tbh, I just prefer it when they're actually funny.


yeh. but yours so much more frequently funny peculiar than funny haha. as in this interchange, for example. afaic this correspondence now closed.


----------



## Santino (May 22, 2015)

Oh, do shut up Pickman's. Take the afternoon off.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

Nice one said:


> Why doesn't this surprise me. 2 years from defending witty (read: posh boy ironic) racist comments about black vaginas to this.
> 
> The privileged middle class will always know which side to fall back on.


the wrong one.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

Santino said:


> Oh, do shut up Pickman's. Take the afternoon off.


oh fuck off you sanctimonious twat


----------



## Cid (May 22, 2015)

There was an interesting article on the sex spectrum (as opposed to the gender spectrum) in nature not long ago (may be behind paywall). It's well worth a read and interesting in that it points out that gender identity is often formed around the age of 3 (in the context of the article after most people with disorders of sex development - DSDs - have been assigned a sex). It's not clear how DSDs relate to gender identity, I'd be hesitant to infer anything from that, but it is interesting food for thought in that context.


----------



## smokedout (May 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Can you C&P the column please? It   let me read it!



sorry, don't have it, was trusting chilango's word


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

Cid said:


> There was an interesting article on the sex spectrum (as opposed to the gender spectrum) in nature not long ago (may be behind paywall). It's well worth a read and interesting in that it points out that gender identity is often formed around the age of 3 (in the context of the article after most people with disorders of sex development - DSDs - have been assigned a sex). It's not clear how DSDs relate to gender identity, I'd be hesitant to infer anything from that, but it is interesting food for thought in that context.


I met an intersex person in March and we had exactly this conversation. He was born male but with some "disorders" that were operated on while he was a baby. He was brought up as male and then a little bit later the decision was taken to operate again to make him appear female and to put him through a female puberty. Now he has the appearance of a woman but is still anatomically male - and identifies as male. He now campaigns very successfully to stop such surgery on intersex children.

We compared experiences of gender identity and found there was a lot of common ground between us. It does seem that the gender dysphoria in intersex people is the same as in trans people and my intersex friend agreed that some trans people, maybe all, may well be on an intersex spectrum given that our scientific knowledge of this area is still so basic.


----------



## Blagsta (May 22, 2015)

Nice one said:


> Why doesn't this surprise me. 2 years from defending witty (read: posh boy ironic) racist comments about black vaginas to this.
> 
> The privileged middle class will always know which side to fall back on.



Some of the comments on there are unbelievable. Apparently anyone who doesn't support Bahar isn't left wing and everyone in the UK is racist. Student politics is really fucked up.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Cid said:


> There was an interesting article on the sex spectrum (as opposed to the gender spectrum) in nature not long ago (may be behind paywall). It's well worth a read and interesting in that it points out that gender identity is often formed around the age of 3 (in the context of the article after most people with disorders of sex development - DSDs - have been assigned a sex). It's not clear how DSDs relate to gender identity, I'd be hesitant to infer anything from that, but it is interesting food for thought in that context.


That's really interesting.


----------



## Celyn (May 22, 2015)

BigTom said:


> ...
> edit: cis is a latin word, in latin it's the antonym for trans. It's been used in chemistry historically so I've learnt on this thread, seems like a wanky academic made up word but actually it's got a certain rightness to it, being derived from language rather than anything gender/sex/biologically based. I really like it as a word for this usage.



I've never studied chemistry, but "cis" also occurs in the usage "cisalpine Gaul" as opposed to "transalpine Gaul", and I've never studied history either, except at school, (and didn't even do "O" Grade), which suggests to me that really must be quite a well-known usage.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

Cid said:


> There was an interesting article on the sex spectrum (as opposed to the gender spectrum) in nature not long ago (may be behind paywall). It's well worth a read and interesting in that it points out that gender identity is often formed around the age of 3 (in the context of the article after most people with disorders of sex development - DSDs - have been assigned a sex). It's not clear how DSDs relate to gender identity, I'd be hesitant to infer anything from that, but it is interesting food for thought in that context.


not behind a paywall here http://www.uam.es/personal_pdi/ciencias/jmsierra/documents/Ainsworth2015Nat.pdf


----------



## smokedout (May 22, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Some of the comments on there are unbelievable. Apparently anyone who doesn't support Bahar isn't left wing and everyone in the UK is racist. Student politics is really fucked up.



everyone except UKIP, who only object to mostly white eastern european immigration and therefore can't be racist


----------



## Blagsta (May 22, 2015)

smokedout said:


> everyone except UKIP, who only object to mostly white eastern european immigration and therefore can't be racist



These idiots really live in a middle class bubble. No wonder the left is so fucked if these people are representative of young people thinking they're doing left wing politics.


----------



## Blagsta (May 22, 2015)

I really don't trust these people


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I really don't trust these people


There's nothing on the libcom forums that I can see. Is it just twitter?


----------



## Blagsta (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> There's nothing on the libcom forums that I can see. Is it just twitter?



Facebook


----------



## smokedout (May 22, 2015)

the most significant act of racism I've seen in the last few years was a black guy screaming at a white family from somewhere in Eastern Europe to fuck off and that they'd destroyed this country etc.  That's not to elevate one act of individual racism abovet structural racism, but to acknowledge that scarcity and hence competition for resources, amongst working class people, is part of the architecture of structural racism, it's not some mystical thing that white people do but a structural and exploitable component of class relations.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Facebook


Oh right. Worse than twitter then.


----------



## Wilf (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> Oh right. Worse than twitter then.





http://www.danteinferno.info/circles-of-hell/circlesofhell.png


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Wilf said:


> http://www.danteinferno.info/circles-of-hell/circlesofhell.png


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Which circle is urban?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> Which circle is urban?


we're purgatory.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> we're purgatory.


Except when the 501s are happening - and then we're limbo.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> Except when the 501s are happening - and then we're limbo.


501s are jeans. you mean 502s.


----------



## cesare (May 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> 501s are jeans. you mean 502s.


Yes, those


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> not at all - but you can't ignore the prefix as there will be times that you may specifically need to refer to trans or cis. I thought I'd explained this tbh.
> 
> But my point is not everyone identifies as male or female. I know a few people that don't - so its a wrong assumption.



Unfortunately, the prefix isn't often added in the media because binarism is the preferred default position of those in power. This has tended to mean that some of those that are aware of the distinctions are the very people suppressing those distinctions, which just makes the fight to naturalise (in a discursive sense) the prefixes more difficult.


----------



## Wilf (May 22, 2015)

With full proportional representation the Virtuous Pagans would have got about 27 seats. And despite losing in Thanet, the Wrath and Sullenness Party would have got about 70.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 22, 2015)

emanymton said:


> Stupid question but what is wrong with trans and not-trans. Which is what I would have used before I heard the word cis.



People should be defined by what they are, not what they're not - that can lead to all sorts of murderous shit.


----------



## emanymton (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> why say non trans when we have cis?
> 
> 
> also - non trans doesn't cut it - there are many different genders that do not identify as cis or trans. 'Non trans' denies their existence!


In general I think we should avoid adding new jargon terms unnecessarily. But your point about people who don't identify as either cis or trans is a good one. Although I wonder if cis and trans don't do the same thing. Don't they suggest a binary?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

emanymton said:


> In general I think we should avoid adding new jargon terms unnecessarily. But your point about people who don't identify as either cis or trans is a good one. Although I wonder if cis and trans don't do the same thing. Don't they suggest a binary?


as the late great tj hooker said, there is no black and white, there are a million shades of grey.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> Which circle is urban?


----------



## crossthebreeze (May 22, 2015)

Cid said:


> There was an interesting article on the sex spectrum (as opposed to the gender spectrum) in nature not long ago (may be behind paywall). It's well worth a read and interesting in that it points out that gender identity is often formed around the age of 3 (in the context of the article after most people with disorders of sex development - DSDs - have been assigned a sex). It's not clear how DSDs relate to gender identity, I'd be hesitant to infer anything from that, but it is interesting food for thought in that context.



I think we need to be careful about being too firm on the idea that gender identity is fixed around the age of 3.

From what i've read, at the age of 3, children are usually aware of their body and begin to understand that they can't change their body at will.
And at that age children start to become very interested in the social rules that they observe around them, and often see these as hard rules (and of course, they will have noticed the strict binary gender roles being imposed on them and all around them).

However, I don't think its correct to say that children who can't fit themselves into this binary and find it too puzzling, or who think they belong on the other side to what is expected on them at age 3 will always identify in this way throughout childhood and adulthood, or that children who do identify themselves with their expected gender at age 3 won't change their minds sometime later.  This doesn't ring true with my childhood experience or the experiences of some other people i've spoken to.  People can be very confused about gender as children but later be happy to be just gender non-conforming; and some people who don't remember "knowing" they were different to what was expected of them at the age of 3 develop gender dysphoria at some later point and go on to transition.


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Someone who identifies with their *assigned* gender from birth would be more accurate



Who on earth identifies with their gender, assigned or not, from _birth_? 

Babies don't have a gender identity apart from the one stuck on them by observers.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> Which circle is urban?


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> Who on earth identifies with their gender, assigned or not, from _birth_?
> 
> Babies don't have a gender identity apart from the one stuck on them by observers.


to be clear then for pedants - idenitfying with gender that was assigned from birth not identifying from birth with their assigned gender.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 22, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Facebook



Who is Harry Akram? He's mates with people on here so don't be shy.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 22, 2015)

They're saying white trash can't be racist. Of course it can't, because it's a dig at social class not race. How much did their education cost?


----------



## Blagsta (May 22, 2015)

I've stopped engaging with them. It's pointless, all you get is abuse.


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> to be clear then for pedants - idenitfying with gender that was assigned from birth not identifying from birth with their assigned gender.



Being accused of pedantry by someone who has happily spent pages on the actual, precise meaning of one word and it's variant antonyms etc is interesting.

It's kind of an important distinction wouldn't you say? If - as your mistake suggests - gender-identity is innate and born with the individual then of course the whole trans* narrative ("a women trapped - born - in a man's body") makes complete sense. If gender-identity isn't innate (which it obviously isn't, I guess we all agree? Since so much of it is socially created) then I question whether that narrative does make sense.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> It's kind of an important distinction wouldn't you say? If - as your mistake suggests - gender-identity is innate and born with the individual then of course the whole trans* narrative ("a women trapped - born - in a man's body") makes complete sense. If gender-identity isn't innate (which it obviously isn't, I guess we all agree? Since so much of it is socially created) then I question whether that narrative does make sense.


wasn't it clear what i meant? - if it was ambiguous you could have asked, instead you assumed something I didn't intend.



co-op said:


> Being accused of pedantry by someone who has happily spent pages on the actual, precise meaning of one word and it's variant antonyms etc is interesting.


 excuse me? What word?



co-op said:


> If gender-identity isn't innate (which it obviously isn't, I guess we all agree? Since so much of it is socially created) then I question whether that narrative does make sense.



Did I say so much that is gender was not socially created? However all the evidence is that children know what gender they are from age 4 and that includes trans children.


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> wasn't it clear what i meant - if it was ambiguous you could have asked, instead you assumed something I didn't intend.



It wasn't ambiguous, it was wrong (imo - and you amended it to agree with that).


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> It wasn't ambiguous, it was wrong (imo - and you amended it to agree with that).


it wasn't wrong - i told you what i meant. It wasn't what you said.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> It wasn't ambiguous, it was wrong (imo - and you amended it to agree with that).


since you're so obviously out to attack me rather than talk, and I just know you're going to call me a man at some point, I'm putting you on ignore.


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> it wasn't wrong - i told you what i meant. It wasn't what you said.



You altered it to agree with my query of it ("for pedants")? I'm not following what you're saying here.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> It wasn't ambiguous, it was wrong (imo - and you amended it to agree with that).



Loads of us read that and knew what she meant. Why didn't you? What are actually upset with her for?


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> since you're so obviously out to attack me rather than talk, and I just know you're going to call me a man at some point, I'm putting you on ignore.



I kind of knew this was coming, and just for the record I would never call a mtf trans person a man.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> You altered it to agree with my query of it ("for pedants")? I'm not following what you're saying here.



Pick, pick, pick, pick


----------



## Citizen66 (May 22, 2015)

Because internets.


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Loads of us read that and knew what she meant. Why didn't you? What are actually upset with her for?



You mean *you* read it and knew, I think. 

She actually changed her post ("for the benefit of pedants" or similar phrase) - to agree with my query of the initial post so why either she - or you - are getting pissed off about this I don't understand (except of course the now-seemingly inevitable end point of any attempt to discuss this, i.e. I am a gibbering transphobe).


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Pick, pick, pick, pick



You don't think it's wrong to say a baby identifies from birth with its assigned gender? Since that's a claim that's consistent with at least some trans theorising here it's legitimate to question it. Turns out it wasn't what AS was claiming, just bulletin board lose language - nothing wrong with that*. So why all the agg?

eta - apart from the fact it's wrong, obvs


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> You mean *you* read it and knew, I think.


 No I am sure others did too. Hence them not pick, pick, picking unnecessarily.



> She actually changed her post ("for the benefit of pedants" or similar phrase) - to agree with my query of the initial post so why either she - or you - are getting pissed off about this I don't understand (except of course the now-seemingly inevitable end point of any attempt to discuss this, i.e. I am a gibbering transphobe).



So what if she changed it? She changed it so no one else can come along and make a fuss about nothing perhaps?




			
				
co-op said:
			
		

> Being accused of pedantry by someone who has happily spent pages on the actual, precise meaning of one word and it's variant antonyms etc is interesting.



She didn't though did she. She explained, clarified, simplified, clarified again for the benefit of those who were engaging with her. What's interesting here is that you are ignoring that fact.


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> So what if she changed it? She changed it so no one else can come along and make a fuss about nothing perhaps?



She changed because (I think) she had said something she didn't mean. Is asking questions of trans people always "making a fuss"?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> She changed because (I think) she had said something she didn't mean. *Is asking questions of trans people always "making a fuss"?*



Showing your true colours there I think.


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

Honestly, this is rubbish Rutita1. And going no where. Sorry for "making a fuss".


----------



## killer b (May 22, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Showing your true colours there I think.


This is out of order.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 22, 2015)

killer b said:


> This is out of order.


This question was out of order I think.



> *Is asking questions of trans people always "making a fuss"?*


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> Being accused of pedantry by someone who has happily spent pages on the actual, precise meaning of one word and it's variant antonyms etc is interesting.


its. it's is a contraction of 'it is'.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

Im not aware i changed the post in question. I didnt think i needed to


----------



## Cid (May 22, 2015)

crossthebreeze said:


> I think we need to be careful about being too firm on the idea that gender identity is fixed around the age of 3.
> 
> From what i've read, at the age of 3, children are usually aware of their body and begin to understand that they can't change their body at will.
> And at that age children start to become very interested in the social rules that they observe around them, and often see these as hard rules (and of course, they will have noticed the strict binary gender roles being imposed on them and all around them).
> ...



That's fair enough, in the article it wasn't a referenced point... I've done it a slight disservice by attempting to shoehorn a detailed discussion of research into sex into a discussion of gender.


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

Id like to also make clear i havent called anyone a transphobe and nor do i intend to


----------



## equationgirl (May 22, 2015)

Thanks for the article AuntiStella and for sharing your transition, your writing is really good x


----------



## Sea Star (May 22, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> Thanks for the article AuntiStella and for sharing your transition, your writing is really good x


Thanks


----------



## killer b (May 22, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> This question was out of order I think.


tell co-op that then and why, rather than denouncing them. it's been a good discussion, it'd be a shame to start on the witch-finding at this point. No-one is posting in bad faith here.


----------



## Red Cat (May 22, 2015)

I have more of a problem using the word cis to define myself than straight because I don't have any conflict with my heterosexuality whereas my identification with femininity is much more complicated, inseparable from my immediate family context, and the wider one of sexism and misogyny. 

I remember some difficulties growing up, though not so much that it was ever debilitating, was much more consciously identified with my dad than with my right-wing 'female' hating mother. I wanted to be a boy when I was about 8, refused to wear a skirt for school, I remember pretending to be sick one day when the only pair of trousers that were clean were some horrible brown ones (1970s) and the alternative was a skirt, being the only girl in jeans on the end of a row of long-skirted girls in our class country dancing show, wrote my name as a boys name in my books. Obviously I wasn't as smart as a boy and of course I was crap at maths and I thought being a girl was a bit shit really. But I don't think I ever felt that I was 'really' a boy I just really, really wanted to be one and tried to magic myself into being one by wanting it so much. It didn't work and after a while I accepted that I was a girl, but not without some feeling of being a fake, a feeling that has got less as I age, especially since pregnancy and birthing and feeding my children, but hasn't totally disappeared.

I was going to post something more political than personal, about continuums rather than binaries, but it came out like this. I'm sure this kind of experience isn't uncommon.


----------



## emanymton (May 22, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> I have more of a problem using the word cis to define myself than straight because I don't have any conflict with my heterosexuality whereas my identification with femininity is much more complicated, inseparable from my immediate family context, and the wider one of sexism and misogyny.
> 
> I remember some difficulties growing up, though not so much that it was ever debilitating, was much more consciously identified with my dad than with my right-wing 'female' hating mother. I wanted to be a boy when I was about 8, refused to wear a skirt for school, I remember pretending to be sick one day when the only pair of trousers that were clean were some horrible brown ones (1970s) and the alternative was a skirt, being the only girl in jeans on the end of a row of long-skirted girls in our class country dancing show, wrote my name as a boys name in my books. Obviously I wasn't as smart as a boy and of course I was crap at maths and I thought being a girl was a bit shit really. But I don't think I ever felt that I was 'really' a boy I just really, really wanted to be one and tried to magic myself into being one by wanting it so much. It didn't work and after a while I accepted that I was a girl, but not without some feeling of being a fake, a feeling that has got less as I age, especially since pregnancy and birthing and feeding my children, but hasn't totally disappeared.
> 
> I was going to post something more political than personal, about continuums rather than binaries, but it came out like this. I'm sure this kind of experience isn't uncommon.


I think this is a point co-op has made a couple of times. None of us feel comfortable with our assigned gender roles, so in a sense there are no cis people. Like you say it is a continuum so some people feel it more depply than other.


----------



## co-op (May 22, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> This question was out of order I think.



It was, of course a direct response to your post below, hence the phrasing. 



Rutita1 said:


> So what if she changed it? She changed it so no one else can come along and make a fuss about nothing perhaps?
> .



I don't think you've added anything to this discussion (at least those parts involving me) except snide comments of this type so from where I'm standing your sudden lunge for the moral high ground isn't very convincing.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2015)

co-op said:


> It was, of course a direct response to your post below, hence the phrasing.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you've added anything to this discussion (at least those parts involving me) except snide comments of this type so from where I'm standing your sudden lunge for the moral high ground isn't very convincing.


i'm no great mate of Rutita1 but you're talking bollocks


----------



## newbie (May 23, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Yeah, at the same time though, there are many more active male users here day in day out, especially in the politics forum.
> 
> As I said before does anyone here have experience of trans women doing this (taking over) in women only spaces? If not I don't know why this is something automatically assumed as a potential problem. Especially since it makes no disctinction between the thoughts and behaviour of a man and those of a trans woman.


gradually catching up on this thread, so forgive the belated answer.  In all the discussion of various spaces no-one has mentioned sport, which is odd because it seems to me that people identified as male at birth may have sufficient height/strength advantages to matter in competitive sport.  Because sport is structured, and because even at the non-elite level, people put so much effort into it, it's likely this will be where many of these issues play out in future.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...omen-footballers-to-undergo-gender-tests.html


----------



## kabbes (May 23, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> I have more of a problem using the word cis to define myself than straight because I don't have any conflict with my heterosexuality whereas my identification with femininity is much more complicated, inseparable from my immediate family context, and the wider one of sexism and misogyny.
> 
> I remember some difficulties growing up, though not so much that it was ever debilitating, was much more consciously identified with my dad than with my right-wing 'female' hating mother. I wanted to be a boy when I was about 8, refused to wear a skirt for school, I remember pretending to be sick one day when the only pair of trousers that were clean were some horrible brown ones (1970s) and the alternative was a skirt, being the only girl in jeans on the end of a row of long-skirted girls in our class country dancing show, wrote my name as a boys name in my books. Obviously I wasn't as smart as a boy and of course I was crap at maths and I thought being a girl was a bit shit really. But I don't think I ever felt that I was 'really' a boy I just really, really wanted to be one and tried to magic myself into being one by wanting it so much. It didn't work and after a while I accepted that I was a girl, but not without some feeling of being a fake, a feeling that has got less as I age, especially since pregnancy and birthing and feeding my children, but hasn't totally disappeared.
> 
> I was going to post something more political than personal, about continuums rather than binaries, but it came out like this. I'm sure this kind of experience isn't uncommon.


Great post.  And I agree, I think it's not uncommon at all, particularly so the more society attempts to rigidly define what it means to be a man or a woman.

Kids are enormous sticklers for social rules too, because they are trying to learn what it all means.  Adults cope better with ambiguity.  A 4 year old is likely to tell you far more precisely (and  erroneously and old-fashionedly) what it means to be a woman.  They can easily then not identify with that definition at that stage in their life.

The current trend to highly gendered toys for kids just exacerbates this, of course.


----------



## co-op (May 23, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Great post.  And I agree, I think it's not uncommon at all, particularly so the more society attempts to rigidly define what it means to be a man or a woman.
> 
> Kids are enormous sticklers for social rules too, because they are trying to learn what it all means.  Adults cope better with ambiguity.  A 4 year old is likely to be tell you far more precisely (and  erroneously and old-fashionedly) what it means to be a woman.  They can easily then not identify with that definition at that stage in their life.
> 
> The current trend to highly gendered toys for kids just exacerbates this, of course.



Adults cope better with ambiguity in some ways, but there are an awful lot of them who seem to me to be playing out really over-the-top performative gender roles, maybe on my mind at the moment because I have a 26 year old woman staying in my house who plays little-girl-woman almost incessantly. I think the psychological driver is that she desperately wants reassurance that she's ok, she's not in the way etc, but paradoxically of course she is driving me up the wall because I just want her to say what she thinks and develop (and project) a sense of her own right to exist and have opinions (that may be at odds with mine) and not constantly creep around and giggle and speak in the voice of a 12 year old. The reason I think of her particularly in the context of your post is that I have a 6 year old daughter who has started speaking in a baby voice since our (longish term) guest turned up, and it's depressing to see how infectious this stuff is - at least partly I assume because this behaviour is subtly endorsed by all sorts of wider social pressure. 

But a row is brewing because in the end I can't tell my girl off for talking like a baby and not tell off the guest. A 6 year old has an excuse for copying this stuff, how does a 26 year old justify it? It probably won't go well.


----------



## Buckaroo (May 23, 2015)

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crim...ersity-officers-race-hate-tweet-10268964.html


----------



## co-op (May 23, 2015)

Nigel Irritable said:


> "Born" is an essentialist way of looking at things. Socialised is a different issue, but what on earth makes you think that the socialisation of cis men and trans women is the same?



It doesn't have to be the same but in my experience it can produce real overlaps. The only time I have been at the beginning of a mixed sex Q & A, and a sea of women's arms shot up and the first 20 minutes was dominated by them which only ended when the chair managed to coax a man into asking something (which he mumbled out rather hesitantly) was at a presentation at a conference for trans people.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 23, 2015)

Why is she stopping in your house co-op ? She sounds irritating.


----------



## co-op (May 23, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Why is she stopping in your house co-op ? She sounds irritating.



Friend of a friend, seemed ok, needed somewhere, you know. She's basically a perfectly fine person but with massive insecurity and hiding behind a juvenile persona and needs to start growing up. But - being a woman - I wonder if she'll be pushed to do this or whether she'll find people (probably men? or "a man"?) who will find it perfectly acceptable behaviour, even Great and then she'll end up like this for life (and venting her frustration about it in all sorts of weird passive-aggression).

Men become arseholes in all sorts of ways but rarely in this way.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 23, 2015)

26 is old for that stuff. I'd been looking after myself and had a kid by that age, as did a lot of other women on here. You tend to grow up pretty fast then.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Buckaroo said:


> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crim...ersity-officers-race-hate-tweet-10268964.html


The police? Good grief. That's way over the top.


----------



## killer b (May 23, 2015)

they haven't been 'called in' - someone reported her to the police on 7th May and they ignored it until the standard approached them for a comment. I expect they plan to ignore it until it blows over...


----------



## TopCat (May 23, 2015)

Who is Harry Akram? Am I shallow for wanting to hit him several times?


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> they haven't been 'called in' - someone reported her to the police on 7th May and they ignored it until the standard approached them for a comment. I expect they plan to ignore it until it blows over...


The media love upping the ante, eh


----------



## killer b (May 23, 2015)

The ante has been almost entirely created, maintained and then pushed by the media, in this case.


----------



## killer b (May 23, 2015)

It's a little worrying tbh: finding an outspoken leftwing student politician and monstering her (it's always _her_) via loose words on twitter seems to be becoming an established pattern for the scum press.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> The ante has been almost entirely created, maintained and then pushed by the media, in this case.


well not "the media": very much a standard job, so one paper has kept this on the go.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> The ante has been almost entirely created, maintained and then pushed by the media, in this case.


My sympathy for her increases in proportion to the increasing shitstorm the media are creating.


----------



## killer b (May 23, 2015)

Could you imagine the field day the fuckers would have with our posting history here if any of us stuck our heads above the parapet?


----------



## Geri (May 23, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Who is Harry Akram? Am I shallow for wanting to hit him several times?


 
He was on Meanwhile at the Bar...forget his username. He unfriended me on Facebook.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> well not "the media": very much a standard job, so one paper has kept this on the go.


The Independent seems to be loving it too.


----------



## brogdale (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> My sympathy for her increases in proportion to the increasing shitstorm the media are creating.


Really? Is this not the sort of publicity that she sought?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> Could you imagine the field day the fuckers would have with our posting history here if any of us stuck our heads above the parapet?


your imagination better than mine perhaps


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> Could you imagine the field day the fuckers would have with our posting history here if any of us stuck our heads above the parapet?


Aye


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> The Independent seems to be loving it too.


yeh but the standard i think vy much the motive force behind this.


----------



## brogdale (May 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> Could you imagine the field day the fuckers would have with our posting history here if any of us stuck our heads above the parapet?


If 'sticking our heads above the parapet' means taking a salaried position as a diversity officer and tweeting inflammatory shite...then, yeah...probably.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Really? Is this not the sort of publicity that she sought?


Not sure. I think the comments were probably naivety rather than some planned attempt at notoriety.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but the standard i think vy much the motive force behind this.


Yes, I agree


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

brogdale said:


> If 'sticking our heads above the parapet' means taking a salaried position as a diversity officer and tweeting inflammatory shite...then, yeah...probably.


this is a one-year elected position.


----------



## TopCat (May 23, 2015)

I don't think she should be sacked. The students themselves can decide on if she is the person they want to elect.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

TopCat said:


> I don't think she should be sacked. The students themselves can decide on if she is the person they want to elect.


she won't be sacked, no time for no confidence procedure before end of term.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> this is a one-year elected position.


If her electorate aren't happy, is a petition the normal way of raising that? I'd have thought there would have been some kind of internal procedure for a confidence vote that wasn't a petition.

Edit: cross posted


----------



## brogdale (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> Not sure. I think the comments were probably naivety rather than some planned attempt at notoriety.


I'm not sure that naivety covers it tbh. If the Indy reported her words correctly, the only regret that she expressed was that the tweets were "*not professional*", and the trope represented "_*in-jokes*_".



> Mustafa said her use of the term "white trash" - an offensive American term referring to poor white people following the Great Depression - on an official account had been "not professional".
> 
> But she added the uses of hashtags such as "kill all white men" on her personal account were "in-jokes and ways that many people in the queer feminist community express ourselves".
> 
> "It's a way of reclaiming the power from the trauma many of us experience as queers, women, people of colour, who are on the receiving end of racism, misogyny and homophobia daily," she added.


----------



## killer b (May 23, 2015)

brogdale said:


> If 'sticking our heads above the parapet' means taking a salaried position as a diversity officer and tweeting inflammatory shite...then, yeah...probably.


The tweeting of inflammatory shit isn't what brought her to their attention - it was the BME-only meeting she organised. The inflammatory shit is just some hostages she gave to fortune. Similar (if less extreme) hostages are given by posters here, and thousands of other left-wing inclined people every day, who may now - justifiably - feel less inclined to bring themselves to attention.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

brogdale said:


> I'm not sure that naivety covers it tbh. If the Indy reported her words correctly, the only regret that she expressed was that the tweets were "*not professional*", and the trope represented "_*in-jokes*_".
> 
> ​


It's still naive.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> If her electorate aren't happy, is a petition the normal way of raising that? I'd have thought there would have been some kind of internal procedure for a confidence vote that wasn't a petition.
> 
> Edit: cross posted


in general vy difficult to remove a sabbatical which requires a quorate general meeting and maybe two quorate meetings. not going to happen.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> in general vy difficult to remove a sabbatical which requires a quorate general meeting and maybe two quorate meetings. not going to happen.


So that's why whoever is behind this, organised a petition and media coverage instead.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> So that's why whoever is behind this, organised a petition and media coverage instead.


i forget the specifick method at goldsmiths, where a petition msy be necessary to start things off. but quorate gms in exams? no.


----------



## killer b (May 23, 2015)

I read something the other day that suggested a third of the student body have to ask for a recall, and then two thirds vote her off in the ensuing election (can't find the reference now though)


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> I read something the other day that suggested a third of the student body have to ask for a recall, and then two thirds vote her off in the ensuing election (can't find the reference now though)


term ends round 12/6, and it simply ain't gonna happen.


----------



## Nice one (May 23, 2015)

brogdale said:


> I'm not sure that naivety covers it tbh. If the Indy reported her words correctly, the only regret that she expressed was that the tweets were "*not professional*", and the trope represented "_*in-jokes*_".
> 
> ​



the newly elected campaigns co-ordinator at goldsmiths also used the #killallwhitemen on his twitter and had to publicly apologise for it. He is white and male, so go figure. It seems to be a goldsmiths self referential arrogant lefty injoke that probably works well in the student union bar amongst like minded people who are _educated_ enough to understand the formula.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i forget the specifick method at goldsmiths, where a petition msy be necessary to start things off. but quorate gms in exams? no.


Cheers.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

Nice one said:


> the newly elected campaigns co-ordinator at goldsmiths also used the #killallwhitemen on his twitter and had to publicly apologise for it. He is white and male, so go figure. It seems to be a goldsmiths self referential arrogant lefty injoke that probably works well in the student union bar amongst like minded people who are _educated_ enough to understand the formula.


or pissed


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Nice one said:


> the newly elected campaigns co-ordinator at goldsmiths also used the #killallwhitemen on his twitter and had to publicly apologise for it. He is white and male, so go figure. It seems to be a goldsmiths self referential arrogant lefty injoke that probably works well in the student union bar amongst like minded people who are _educated_ enough to understand the formula.


This #killallwhitemen isn't new, eh. It's an established trope which would be quite good if it was actually funny.


----------



## brogdale (May 23, 2015)

Nice one said:


> the newly elected campaigns co-ordinator at goldsmiths also used the #killallwhitemen on his twitter and had to publicly apologise for it. He is white and male, so go figure. It seems to be a goldsmiths self referential arrogant lefty injoke that probably works well in the student union bar amongst like minded people who are _educated_ enough to understand the formula.


Well...if I go figure...it seems that he obviously felt it was an error to tweet that, or he would have felt no need to apologise for it. For the succeeding officer to do the same appears to suggest that she either failed to learn from his experience, or wilfully sought to perpetuate the 'in joke'...whatever the consequences.


----------



## Nice one (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> This #killallwhitemen isn't new, eh. It's an established trope which would be quite good if it was actually funny.



in terms of goldsmiths, don't know how old it is. He used the term in may of this year after being elected along with mustafa. I think it's a massive red herring personally, although jackpot for a mainstream press looking a scream out headline.


----------



## brogdale (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> This #killallwhitemen isn't new, eh. It's an established trope which would be quite good if it was actually funny.


Would "all white men" include jews?


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Nice one said:


> in terms of goldsmiths, don't know how old it is. He used the term in may of this year after being elected along with mustafa. I think it's a massive red herring personally, although jackpot for a mainstream press looking a scream out headline.


Aye.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Would "all white men" include jews?


I've got no idea. Why bring Jews into it?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> I've got no idea. Why bring Jews into it?


angling for another standard headline


----------



## Nice one (May 23, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Well...if I go figure...it seems that he obviously felt it was an error to tweet that, or he would have felt no need to apologise for it. For the succeeding officer to do the same appears to suggest that she either failed to learn from his experience, or wilfully sought to perpetuate the 'in joke'...whatever the consequences.



just to clarify they both got elected together this year as officers. I'm assuming they are either good friends or have shared political outlooks. 

incoming sabb apologies for tweet


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> angling for another standard headline


Quite!


----------



## brogdale (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> I've got no idea. Why bring Jews into it?


Just trying to explore quite how funny this joke is/was.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> I've got no idea. Why bring Jews into it?



Because presumably white means oppressor rather than oppressed.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Just trying to explore quite how funny this joke is/was.


I don't think #killallwhitemenexceptjews is any funnier, tbh.


----------



## Athos (May 23, 2015)

What about the other spokes on the intersectionalist wheel?  Don't we need some sort of Boolean operator?

#killALL(whiteANDmen)EXCEPT(jewsORgaysORdisabledORgypsy [etc., etc.])

Not quite so catchy, though.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 23, 2015)

This entire thing is just an irrelevant fuss about fuck all. Like all twitter politics.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> This entire thing is just an irrelevant fuss about fuck all. Like all twitter politics.


It's primarily student politics that's spilled onto Twitter, I think.


----------



## emanymton (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> Not sure. I think the comments were probably naivety rather than some planned attempt at notoriety.


isn't it mainly a case of taking shit like many of us might do with mates? Just that with Twitter and Facebook the boundary between public and private is fading. And that some people aren't sensible enough to realise this.

I remember back when the invasion of Afghanistan was kicking off and I was setting up an anti-war stall and my mate come to help us. When he got there he pulled me away from anyone else and and told me the following joke. 

'Bin Laden was on ready steady cook last night. He made a big apple crumble' 

He was sensible enough to make sure no one else heard. But had it been made it a public way (like twitter is) and had either of is been worth the effort it is the sort of thing that could be used as ammunition.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

emanymton said:


> isn't it mainly a case of taking shit like many of us might do with mates? Just that with Twitter and Facebook the boundary between public and private is fading. And that some people aren't sensible enough to realise this.
> 
> I remember back when the invasion of Afghanistan was kicking off and I was setting up an anti-war stall and my mate come to help us. When he got there he pulled me away from anyone else and and told me the following joke.
> 
> ...



I think that's probably got a lot to do with it. There's been so many instances of twitter storms you'd think people would have learnt by now, but it seems not.


----------



## emanymton (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> I think that's probably got a lot to do with it. There's been so many instances of twitter storms you'd think people would have learnt by now, but it seems not.


I can't work out it if I think young  people who have pretty much grow up with this stuff should be more or less aware of it.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

emanymton said:


> I can't work out it if I think young  people who have pretty much grow up with this stuff should be more or less aware of it.


I think they forget that their twitter audience is wider than their personal bubble. For example, I can't imagine Bahar Mustafa mouthing off about "white trash" in Woolwich market just up the road but I can imagine her using "white trash" in Goldsmiths which is essentially quite a protected elitist environment relatively untroubled by impoverished people. She'll get more shit for the #killallwhitemen trope though, even though the actual offensive comment was white trash.


----------



## rekil (May 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> let's promote equality and just #kill


We've pushed for a first strike nuke policy dozens of times with varying degrees of fanaticism. I don't think we can be any more unequivocal. Where's our denunciation in the booji press?


----------



## kabbes (May 23, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> This entire thing is just an irrelevant fuss about fuck all. Like all twitter politics.


Indeed.  Meanwhile people with actual power are making actual decisions that are ruining actual lives and it's being ignored because nobody is tweeting stupid hashtags about it.


----------



## Athos (May 23, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Indeed.  Meanwhile people with actual power are making actual decisions that are ruining actual lives and it's being ignored because nobody is tweeting stupid hashtags about it.



#killalltories


----------



## Nice one (May 23, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> This entire thing is just an irrelevant fuss about fuck all. Like all twitter politics.



I think there's a bit more to it than that. It's basically shining a light on a world most ordinary people have never been a part of or had access to - that of the radical left university body politic. 

And as with anything you shine a light on it only illuminates half the picture and casts shadows that are often exaggerated and misformed. 

That said it must be hellish to be around these people if you're not part of their clique and I genuinely feel for any decent working class student studying at goldsmiths if this is the best this environment has to offer in terms of left wing engagement.


----------



## Wilf (May 23, 2015)

In some ways this is a perfect example of what happens when equality politics gets absorbed into personnel departments, local government, universities etc - pretty much the story of the last 30 years or more.  I don't agree with her politics, I think they are highly divisive, but they are real actual politics. But when you squeeze them into a 'post', when you institutionalise them, politics are not supposed to be jagged or real. They are supposed to be smooth, glossy and unchallenging to the institution.  She's made the assumption that it's okay to be an intersectionalist when in this post. She's wrong, you've got to be a smooth, reasonable, managerialist intersectionalist.


----------



## Blagsta (May 23, 2015)

emanymton said:


> I think this is a point co-op has made a couple of times. None of us feel comfortable with our assigned gender roles, so in a sense there are no cis people. Like you say it is a continuum so some people feel it more depply than other.



Yes. Being a boy is rubbish if you don't particularly like football and fighting, if you cry easily and like learning stuff.


----------



## Wilf (May 23, 2015)

Nice one said:


> That said it must be hellish to be around these people if you're not part of their clique and I genuinely feel for any decent working class student studying at goldsmiths if this is the best this environment has to offer in terms of left wing engagement.


 Yeah, and following on from my bit below your post, it's the sense that this clique end up with a (kind of) official stamp, become one of the gatekeepers of equality.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 23, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Indeed.  Meanwhile people with actual power are making actual decisions that are ruining actual lives and it's being ignored because nobody is tweeting stupid hashtags about it.


Well quite. It's best ignored for what it is. Like that stupid woman Laurie Penny. No relevance to the vast majority.


----------



## inva (May 23, 2015)

Wilf said:


> In some ways this is a perfect example of what happens when equality politics gets absorbed into personnel departments, local government, universities etc - pretty much the story of the last 30 years or more.  I don't agree with her politics, I think they are highly divisive, but they are real actual politics. But when you squeeze them into a 'post', when you institutionalise them, politics are not supposed to be jagged or real. They are supposed to be smooth, glossy and unchallenging to the institution.  She's made the assumption that it's okay to be an intersectionalist when in this post. She's wrong, you've got to be a smooth, reasonable, managerialist intersectionalist.


isn't it sort of the other way around as well though? In the sense that intersectionalism seems to me to be a kind of educationalist/institutional theory or way of doing things that people are trying to use in the real world, hence crude stuff like killallmen and all sorts of weird permutations.


----------



## Wilf (May 23, 2015)

inva said:


> isn't it sort of the other way around as well though? In the sense that intersectionalism seems to me to be a kind of educationalist/institutional theory or way of doing things that people are trying to use in the real world, hence crude stuff like killallmen and all sorts of weird permutations.


Yeah, definitely, intersectionality has it roots in academia (Kimberly Crenshaw).  Suppose my point is there's an interaction between academia and a version of feminism/'radical politics' that becomes essentially that - a conversation between those 2 parties. It isn't rooted in working class life or struggle. But it's also some of the same people over a generation or more who have been informing institutional practices around equality and multiculturalism.  It links into that which becomes safe and anodyne and indeed the power structures of local government, universities etc.


----------



## Blagsta (May 23, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Who is Harry Akram? Am I shallow for wanting to hit him several times?



He's a dick  whoever he is


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, and following on from my bit below your post, it's the sense that this clique end up with a (kind of) official stamp, become one of the gatekeepers of equality.


And it's also in this sense that I have a feeling of déjà vu from the 80s and depressing feeling of a return to that type of regressive identity politics.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, definitely, intersectionality has it roots in academia (Kimberly Crenshaw).  Suppose my point is there's an interaction between academia and a version of feminism/'radical politics' that becomes essentially that - a conversation between those 2 parties. It isn't rooted in working class life or struggle. But it's also some of the same people over a generation or more who have been informing institutional practices around equality and multiculturalism.  It links into that which becomes safe and anodyne and indeed the power structures of local government, universities etc.


It's the institutionalism of what should be personal freedoms.


----------



## Blagsta (May 23, 2015)

brogdale said:


> I'm not sure that naivety covers it tbh. If the Indy reported her words correctly, the only regret that she expressed was that the tweets were "*not professional*", and the trope represented "_*in-jokes*_".
> 
> ​



I was starting to have a little sympathy with her. If she's been reported correctly, then I'm starting to lose my sympathy again.


----------



## Blagsta (May 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> The tweeting of inflammatory shit isn't what brought her to their attention - it was the BME-only meeting she organised. The inflammatory shit is just some hostages she gave to fortune. Similar (if less extreme) hostages are given by posters here, and thousands of other left-wing inclined people every day, who may now - justifiably - feel less inclined to bring themselves to attention.



Although this is true too. 

What a mess.


----------



## xslavearcx (May 23, 2015)

Athos said:


> What about the other spokes on the intersectionalist wheel?  Don't we need some sort of Boolean operator?
> 
> #killALL(whiteANDmen)EXCEPT(jewsORgaysORdisabledORgypsy [etc., etc.])
> 
> Not quite so catchy, though.


lefties don't generally do analytic philosophy


----------



## Blagsta (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's still naive.



I've said it before, but I'm glad the Internet didn't exist when I was younger, I used to say all sorts of stupid stuff. Still do tbh.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Nice one said:


> I think there's a bit more to it than that. It's basically shining a light on a world most ordinary people have never been a part of or had access to - that of the radical left university body politic.
> 
> *And as with anything you shine a light on it only illuminates half the picture and casts shadows that are often exaggerated and misformed.*
> 
> That said it must be hellish to be around these people if you're not part of their clique and I genuinely feel for any decent working class student studying at goldsmiths if this is the best this environment has to offer in terms of left wing engagement.



I particularly like what you said there ^ (my emphasis)


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I've said it before, but I'm glad the Internet didn't exist when I was younger, I used to say all sorts of stupid stuff. Still do tbh.


Yes, me too


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 23, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> 26 is old for that stuff. I'd been looking after myself and had a kid by that age, as did a lot of other women on here. You tend to grow up pretty fast then.



My mother-in-law doesn't do baby-talk (thank fuck) but she still plays the poor helpless female role for all it's worth. it's really quite tiring.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 23, 2015)

Yeah well as is men assuming control all the time tbf


----------



## Red Cat (May 23, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Who is Harry Akram? Am I shallow for wanting to hit him several times?



Is he in One Direction?


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 23, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> Is he in One Direction?


That's Harry Styles


----------



## Nigel Irritable (May 23, 2015)

co-op said:


> It doesn't have to be the same but in my experience it can produce real overlaps. The only time I have been at the beginning of a mixed sex Q & A, and a sea of women's arms shot up and the first 20 minutes was dominated by them which only ended when the chair managed to coax a man into asking something (which he mumbled out rather hesitantly) was at a presentation at a conference for trans people.



So your grounds for being trans exclusionary consist of the view that once upon a time you saw trans women being too confident?


----------



## Red Cat (May 23, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> That's Harry Styles



I know, it was a joke


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> And it's also in this sense that I have a feeling of déjà vu from the 80s and depressing feeling of a return to that type of regressive identity politics.



You and me both.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 23, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Yeah well as is men assuming control all the time tbf



M-i-L was taught that deferring to men flattered their ego and made them more well-disposed to you. It drives Greebo absolutely garrity, because her mum is actually a very competent woman - she just always falls back on the "poor helpless me" thing.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> I think they forget that their twitter audience is wider than their personal bubble. For example, I can't imagine Bahar Mustafa mouthing off about "white trash" in Woolwich market just up the road but I can imagine her using "white trash" in Goldsmiths which is essentially quite a protected elitist environment relatively untroubled by impoverished people. She'll get more shit for the #killallwhitemen trope though, even though the actual offensive comment was white trash.



It shows poor judgment. I don't think she should necessarily lose her job over it, but elected politicians have had to resign over saying stupid things in unguarded moments. 

The scrutiny she is facing is very similar to the various loons in UKIP who have had to stand down. 

That is what grown up politics in the UK is like.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 23, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Yes. Being a boy is rubbish if you don't particularly like football and fighting, if you cry easily and like learning stuff.



I think things are getting better though?


----------



## billy_bob (May 23, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I've said it before, but I'm glad the Internet didn't exist when I was younger, I used to say all sorts of stupid stuff. Still do tbh.



Agree for the same (and many other) reasons. I now can't imagine life without it, but I'm very glad I didn't really have to live life on it until I was pretty much sure who I was and what kind of things I thought were/weren't ok to say and do.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> You and me both.


Aye 

I find myself in a conflicting position where I'm critical of her politics but at the same time supportive of her against what seems to me to be an engineered political assassination.


----------



## Blagsta (May 23, 2015)

Fozzie Bear said:


> I think things are getting better though?



Probably, yes.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 23, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> M-i-L was taught that deferring to men flattered their ego and made them more well-disposed to you. It drives Greebo absolutely garrity, because her mum is actually a very competent woman - she just always falls back on the "poor helpless me" thing.


I do it tbf


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 23, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Yes. Being a boy is rubbish if you don't particularly like football and fighting, if you cry easily and like learning stuff.



Aye, had a lot of weird looks for having no interest in either (tbf I'm not a fan of watching any sports really, no problems with people playing the games mind)


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> Aye
> 
> I find myself in a conflicting position where I'm critical of her politics but at the same time supportive of her against what seems to me to be an engineered political assassination.



I feel similarly, although I'm somewhat annoyed that she left those "hostages to fortune" in the first place. First rule of politician club is "leave no traces of the boots you put in".


----------



## killer b (May 23, 2015)

Nobody really has that option anymore tbh. If you've had a social media presence over the past 15 years, and especially if you've grown up with the public/private porousness that SM brings, then I can guarantee that, should someone choose to dig, there'll be something.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> I feel similarly, although I'm somewhat annoyed that she left those "hostages to fortune" in the first place. First rule of politician club is "leave no traces of the boots you put in".


Absolutely. It's also annoying that this will possibly result in her being propelled into an equalities officer job at some big NGO where the only modification of her politics will be how she phrases them on social media.


----------



## Wilf (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> Absolutely. It's also annoying that this will possibly result in her being propelled into an equalities officer job at some big NGO where the only modification of her politics will be how she phrases them on social media.




... and if she's particularly good at it, she'll have OBE within 20 years. The process will be complete.


----------



## smokedout (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> I've got no idea. Why bring Jews into it?



I think this angle is significant.  I have no problem at all with the #killallwhitemen hashtag, but she was a diversity office for a large multi-ethnic and international student, tweeting an in joke.  how would someone who isn't in on that joke, who's Jewish perhaps, or a white gay man from eastern europe whose first language isn't english feel if they saw their diversity officer tweeting that, would they then feel comfortable approaching for help, what if they had been a victim of racism as many eastern europeans are?

she made her position un-tenable in my opinion, whether she should be sacked for that is for the union, but there doesnt seem to be any awareness that most of the student body are probably not in her clique and its her job to represent them.  the media shitstorm is obviously horrible and I have some sympathy, but what she did was stupid because this stuff is potentially very damaging and is racist, not towards the larger white uk population particularly, but to minorities from overseas.  she doesn't seem to have thought about that at all.


----------



## Wilf (May 23, 2015)

smokedout said:


> she made her position un-tenable in my opinion, whether she should be sacked for that is for the union, but there doesnt seem to be any awareness that most of the student body are probably not in her clique and its her job to represent them.  the media shitstorm is obviously horrible and I have some sympathy, but what she did was stupid because this stuff is potentially very damaging and is racist, not towards the larger white uk population particularly, but to minorities from overseas.  she doesn't seem to have thought about that at all.


The irony is, I suspect the university see it in these terms.  I can only guess, but I'd suspect Goldsmiths had no problem with having a (slightly) edgy student equalities officer, in their corporate judgement thought it might fit with being in a multicultural city.  However if her actions in any way got in the way of their PR strategy or, even more, put off future 'customers' they'd feel less cosy.


----------



## smokedout (May 23, 2015)

I'm not sure Goldsmiths themselves have a say, but I can imagine pressure from that direction


----------



## Wilf (May 23, 2015)

smokedout said:


> I'm not sure Goldsmiths themselves have a say, but I can imagine pressure from that direction


Yeah, just a process of distancing. Already seen it one of the quotes earlier in the thread.  Anyway, presumably it's a one year sabbatical, so she'll be finished in a couple of months.


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

smokedout I still think a better example would be (as you suggest) Eastern European men because I don't see why Jews = white assumption (although I do, of course, get the Jews = oppressed angle).


----------



## smokedout (May 23, 2015)

yes, its not the best example, but there doesn;t seem to be any understanding that in Europe (and other continents) then racism is a more complex phenomena both historically and currently than just white racism towards black people, and actually her position is pretty ludicrous outside of a US based context,  that it actually dismisses the situation in many countries around the world is in itself anglo-centric

Idi Amin #notaracist
Nigel Farage #notaracist
Adolf Hitler #notaracist

etc


----------



## Nice one (May 23, 2015)

Jesus the libcom facebook page has entered surreal territory

"Racism against white men does not exist...."

"Have a word with some Irish men who lived through the 70s and 80s...."

"What have middle aged Irish men got to do with owt"

Even white posh twat "black vagina" boy chimes in accruing his intersectional points 

Happily buy victor a pint. (Or indeed a fruit based drink).


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

I can imagine in terms of "ism = prejudice + power" there may be quite a few individuals trying to add up the power relations of Eastern European men ... deduct some for racism when in the UK, they still have some for patriarchy both in UK and also country of origin... on balance is it still ok to say. NO IT'S NOT


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> Nobody really has that option anymore tbh. If you've had a social media presence over the past 15 years, and especially if you've grown up with the public/private porousness that SM brings, then I can guarantee that, should someone choose to dig, there'll be something.


i have left a gret treasure trove besides which the riches of the count of monte cristo are as nothing.


----------



## Blagsta (May 23, 2015)

Nice one said:


> Jesus the libcom facebook page has entered surreal territory
> 
> "Racism against white men does not exist...."
> 
> ...



It's proper batshit


----------



## Wilf (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> I can imagine in terms of "ism = prejudice + power" there may be quite a few individuals trying to add up the power relations of Eastern European men ... deduct some for racism when in the UK, they still have some for patriarchy both in UK and also country of origin... on balance is it still ok to say. NO IT'S NOT


I wouldn't dream of entering one of those discussions without one of those hand held scanners you can use to see how much you've spent at tescos.  *beep* paper wraps rock... *beep* but rock blunts scissors..


----------



## DotCommunist (May 23, 2015)

or a decoder ring for the wheel of oppression


----------



## cesare (May 23, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I wouldn't dream of entering one of those discussions without one of those hand held scanners you can use to see how much you've spent at tescos.  *beep* paper wraps rock... *beep* but rock blunts scissors..


----------



## TopCat (May 23, 2015)

I was put off going to University because I met loads of students where my older sister studied. I could not envisage spending three or four years in the company of highly opinionated kids who had fuck all life experience. Being a white working class bloke at Goldsmiths could well be a fucking nightmare.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 23, 2015)

I was put off university because an apprenticeship meant I could afford to buy drugs.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 23, 2015)

And my grades were shit.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I was put off university because an apprenticeship meant I could afford to buy drugs.


wouldn't be the case if you were an apprentice now, unless you were apprentice to lord alan sugar of white hart lane.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> And my grades were shit.


no


----------



## DotCommunist (May 23, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> And my grades were shit.


I got no a levels. Portfolio of written work, poetry and so on, was my passport in. All done while working full time. Never be allowed these days, they ramped up the UCAS points needed for entry at the same time they ramped up the fees.

#proledem


----------



## Belushi (May 23, 2015)

Me neither, I did an access course in my twenties. Wouldn't be able to do that now since the coalition introduced a 4k fee.


----------



## co-op (May 23, 2015)

Nigel Irritable said:


> So your grounds for being trans exclusionary consist of the view that once upon a time you saw trans women being too confident?



Why answer a post with a straw man argument? Just a waste of time.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (May 23, 2015)

co-op said:


> Why answer a post with a straw man argument? Just a waste of time.



An argument that trans women are socialised like men because you were at a meeting once where trans women put up their hands to speak too quickly isn't worth engaging with further.


----------



## likesfish (May 23, 2015)

Intersectionalty suprisingly isnt a stupid concept who knew 
 Its a horrible horrible word though
  First hear about how via a us based sci fi website so scandal travels across world these days


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> I can imagine in terms of "ism = prejudice + power" there may be quite a few individuals trying to add up the power relations of Eastern European men ... deduct some for racism when in the UK, they still have some for patriarchy both in UK and also country of origin... on balance is it still ok to say. NO IT'S NOT



There'll always be people who believe that they can quantify some sort of hierarchy of oppression. Often people who'd derive benefit from doing so.


----------



## seventh bullet (May 23, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Who is Harry Akram? Am I shallow for wanting to hit him several times?



He's the trainee doctor dropout anarchist who got into a strop and denounced me as middle class (lol) edit: removed.


----------



## Wilf (May 23, 2015)

harry akram is xxxxxxxxxx?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 23, 2015)

Similar posting style from way back tbh.


----------



## Blagsta (May 24, 2015)

Whoever he is, he has a distinct lack of politics and a distinct liking of throwing abuse around. Poisonous as fuck.


----------



## TopCat (May 24, 2015)

My


Citizen66 said:


> I was put off university because an apprenticeship meant I could afford to buy drugs.


apprenticeship


Nigel Irritable said:


> An argument that trans women are socialised like men because you were at a meeting once where trans women put up their hands to too quickly isn't worth engaging with further.





Citizen66 said:


> I was put off university because an apprenticeship meant I could afford to buy drugs.


i earned £45 a week as an apprentice toolmaker and had £25 rent on my bedsit. No room for drugs..


----------



## Citizen66 (May 24, 2015)

TopCat said:


> My
> 
> apprenticeship
> 
> ...



Fair dos. I lived with my folks until aged 22 when I moved to London because my sister needed a room mate and I needed work; it being predictably scarce in the NE. So I was never skint proper.


----------



## TopCat (May 24, 2015)

I moved out at sixteen. Thought I knew it all. I learned quick.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

This thread's turned into urban redwatch.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

******* doesn't have the right of reply on here of course - he was chased off a couple of years back by racism.


----------



## Blagsta (May 24, 2015)

Bad form to out him publicly, yes. 

I barely remember him tbh. What happened with him leaving here cos of racism?


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Bad form to out him publicly, yes.
> 
> I barely remember him tbh. What happened with him leaving here cos of racism?


I wasn't posting on here at the time. ******  told me about it in the pub so I came back to have a look for myself. It was missed by a lot of the regular posters at the time because it happened in the football forum. Once people became aware they made a huge fuss, led iirc by Citizen66 but he'd gone by then. It was a comment about his Pakistani heritage.


----------



## Blagsta (May 24, 2015)

That's not good.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 24, 2015)

I can't mention that instance any more because I enjoy doing so. Outing is bad, I guess. But the proper left is tiny. Joining the dots is simple


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I can't mention that instance any more because I enjoy doing so. Outing is bad, I guess. But the proper left is tiny. Joining the dots is simple


But you appreciate that in the circumstances it's not likely that he'd come back to defend himself?


----------



## DotCommunist (May 24, 2015)

Ethnic pakistani tosser was the insult thrown at him, on a thread for the football. You know the 'end of season' ones the football fans do on a club by club basis. It came to the attention of everyone non-footie loving sometime later and recieved its due revulsion. Too late by that point of course, Refused had left because he didn't want to be somewhere where he'd be given casual racist shit.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

What new depths can this thread plumb now? We've had hate speech, concern trolling, treating people like biological specimens, and now publically outing a known comrade that we'd previously subjected to racism. It's fucking disgusting.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

*


----------



## Nigel Irritable (May 24, 2015)

Jesus, I hadn't heard why he stopped posting before. That's grim.


----------



## Vintage Paw (May 24, 2015)

Thora said:


> Why can't everyone, male, female or otherwise, dress and behave however they want?  We should be moving away from these strict gender roles of man/woman - especially with them defined entirely on how you look and behave!  Women have struggled for years against this.



You say this, but you're vehemently defending your right to be a 'real' woman, saying there is something inherent and essential about it. At the same time as saying transwomen shouldn't want to be women because it's essentialist.

This tactic is old and transparent and very frustrating.


----------



## co-op (May 24, 2015)

Nigel Irritable said:


> An argument that trans women are socialised like men because you were at a meeting once where trans women put up their hands to speak too quickly isn't worth engaging with further.



The original question posed by you (too far back in this thread for me to find) was along the lines of "is there any difference in the gender socialisation of a cis man and a trans woman?". So I gave an example of trans women acting in accordance with male socialised behaviour, trans men with female. We're all intelligent people, we understand that one anecdote on it's own doesn't make a case but I used to question the idea that we would expect people socialised as men (or women) to suddenly, spontaneously abandon that socialisation when they transition to the "opposite" sex - or to have somehow resisted that socialisation when it was happening, on the grounds of internal psychological/emotional factors.

If you don't think that (eg) mtftp's were socialised as men, what do you think was happening to them before they became aware that they were a trans person?


FWIW I don't think I'm "trans-exclusionary", there's absolutely no reason why I need/want/would prefer any environment I exist in to exclude any trans person on the grounds of their gender/sex (and I'm pretty sure I'll have spent a lot more time socially in the company of trans people than the vast majority of the population). But I think non-trans women are entitled to have opinions about this question that are not dictated by people socialised as men.

If there is ever a need for "women only spaces" (and maybe you disagree with that?) then defining who is allowed into those spaces is pretty important to women don't you think?


----------



## co-op (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> You say this, but you're vehemently defending your right to be a 'real' woman, saying there is something inherent and essential about it. At the same time as saying transwomen shouldn't want to be women because it's essentialist.
> 
> This tactic is old and transparent and very frustrating.



There's an essentialist version of both sides of this argument - on the trans side "a woman born in a man's body", on the other stuff about chromosones etc. There's been so many posts on this thread I can't keep up but if you think Thora has been saying she is a "real" woman, it would be very helpful if you quoted where she has done this, otherwise it looks like the kind of lazy assumption that (imo) Nigel Irritable made when he described me as "trans-exclusionary"


----------



## Vintage Paw (May 24, 2015)

Nigel Irritable said:


> The other way of looking at that is that allowing and even encouraging people to reject their assigned gender or even to declare themselves "non-binary" in fact undermines strict assumptions about how natural, intrinsic and immutable gender is. While forbidding them to do so has essentialist consequences. And this is so even where the person rejecting their assigned role uses essentialist arguments to justify that decision and those who seek to limit their ability to reject those roles do so in the name of gender abolition.
> 
> Much of the attraction of essentialist arguments for many trans people by the way comes from a need to justify themselves in the face of hostility and rejection. And much of the reason why some trans people tend to adopt very traditional versions of masculinity and femininity stems from medical and political institutions forcing them to do so if they wish to be taken seriously or assisted in any way.



I wanted to take the opportunity to applaud this post. It explains a very complex concept really well.


----------



## Vintage Paw (May 24, 2015)

I'm with cesare - this thread is the saddest I've read for a long time. It's opened my eyes to the things some people can believe while simultaneously being 'progressive' (thank you pickman's for teaching me fwoabt). I suppose that shouldn't be a surprise, considering for example the way some left-wing men can be when it comes to feminism. Why should it be any different for anything else?

I repeat my praise for Nigel's post. Any and all arguments around subversion/reinforcement of gender and gender roles (actually 2 different things) should end with a good read and understanding of that.

And I suppose all I can say is I'm sure all the trans* people who might potentially read this are really happy that a bunch of cis people have got together - yet again - to argue the toss about what existence they are allowed to live.

Bravo. One of your darkest moments, urban.


----------



## Blagsta (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> What new depths can this thread plumb now? We've had hate speech, concern trolling, treating people like biological specimens, and now publically outing a known comrade that we'd previously subjected to racism. It's fucking disgusting.



Hardly a comrade, given his behaviour on the Facebook thread.


----------



## likesfish (May 24, 2015)

If you have a problem with trans people and your special snowflake women's only space congratulations your now less progressive than the British Army that's got to be some sort of record
  their  are serving trans soldiers friday was sir Monday now addressed as M'am carry on.


----------



## Red Cat (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> I'm with cesare - this thread is the saddest I've read for a long time. It's opened my eyes to the things some people can believe while simultaneously being 'progressive' (thank you pickman's for teaching me fwoabt). I suppose that shouldn't be a surprise, considering for example the way some left-wing men can be when it comes to feminism. Why should it be any different for anything else?
> 
> I repeat my praise for Nigel's post. Any and all arguments around subversion/reinforcement of gender and gender roles (actually 2 different things) should end with a good read and understanding of that.
> 
> ...



Our arguments should end with one final argument? I agree that Nigel's post is a good one, but it should also be ok to grapple with the subject by disagreeing and arguing out loud, surely that's how movement in thinking occurs. 

Who is this bunch of cis people who have got together?


----------



## Red Cat (May 24, 2015)

Can we not drag facebook stuff onto urban? They are different spaces. Some of us on here have chosen not to use facebook.


----------



## killer b (May 24, 2015)

'one of our darkest moments'? Jesus.


----------



## Belushi (May 24, 2015)

It's been a very interesting discussion, its really made me think.


----------



## co-op (May 24, 2015)

likesfish said:


> If you have a problem with trans people and your special snowflake women's only space congratulations your now less progressive than the British Army that's got to be some sort of record
> their  are serving trans soldiers friday was sir Monday now addressed as M'am carry on.



I wonder if this is because the British Army is a post-gender, post-patriarchical institution or if they find that adopting elements of some versions of trans* ideology is surprisingly easy for a right-wing reactionary institution dedicated to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists?


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Hardly a comrade, given his behaviour on the Facebook thread.


I've got no idea about Facebook. If you have a problem with what he's posted there you should tell him there.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

co-op said:


> I wonder if this is because the British Army is a post-gender, post-patriarchical institution or if they find that adopting elements of some versions of trans* ideology is surprisingly easy for a right-wing reactionary institution dedicated to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists?



Which elements of trans* ideology make it "surprisingly easy for a right-wing reactionary institution dedicated to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists" to adopt?


----------



## co-op (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> I suppose that shouldn't be a surprise, considering for example the way some left-wing men can be when it comes to feminism.



And as for those left-wing women, man some of them, they're the _worst. _


----------



## Blagsta (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> I've got no idea about Facebook. If you have a problem with what he's posted there you should tell him there.



I have done.


----------



## stethoscope (May 24, 2015)

co-op said:


> I wonder if this is because the British Army is a post-gender, post-patriarchical institution or if they find that adopting elements of some versions of trans* ideology is surprisingly easy for a right-wing reactionary institution dedicated to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists?



Fucking hell


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

stethoscope said:


> Fucking hell


Innit


----------



## kabbes (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> I'm with cesare - this thread is the saddest I've read for a long time. It's opened my eyes to the things some people can believe while simultaneously being 'progressive' (thank you pickman's for teaching me fwoabt). I suppose that shouldn't be a surprise, considering for example the way some left-wing men can be when it comes to feminism. Why should it be any different for anything else?
> 
> I repeat my praise for Nigel's post. Any and all arguments around subversion/reinforcement of gender and gender roles (actually 2 different things) should end with a good read and understanding of that.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry, but that's one of the darkest and saddest misreadings of a thread that I've read for a long time.


----------



## likesfish (May 24, 2015)

co-op said:


> I wonder if this is because the British Army is a post-gender, post-patriarchical institution or if they find that adopting elements of some versions of trans* ideology is surprisingly easy for a right-wing reactionary institution dedicated to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists?



Or more that they go " hmmm well ok, can the soldier still do their job? Yes/no. if yes then carry one.
  Britsh armys not really a thinking organisation so ideology is never going to be a problem.
 Its a conservative organisation rather than reactionary it happily arrested gays and kicked them out long after it wasnt a problem in civvy street whwn the rules changed it turned out not to be a problem.
 Although one soldiers attempt to make a big thing about coming out was rather brutally curtailled because,
 " we know mate why the fuck do you think you were nicknamed NARNIA"


----------



## co-op (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> Which elements of trans* ideology make it "surprisingly easy for a right-wing reactionary institution dedicated to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists" to adopt?



You meant "elements of some versions of trans* ideology", right? 

Any version which simply takes existing gender roles and allows individuals to alter their own position in relations to those existing roles.


----------



## Blagsta (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> I'm with cesare - this thread is the saddest I've read for a long time. It's opened my eyes to the things some people can believe while simultaneously being 'progressive' (thank you pickman's for teaching me fwoabt). I suppose that shouldn't be a surprise, considering for example the way some left-wing men can be when it comes to feminism. Why should it be any different for anything else?
> 
> I repeat my praise for Nigel's post. Any and all arguments around subversion/reinforcement of gender and gender roles (actually 2 different things) should end with a good read and understanding of that.
> 
> ...



This just looks like an attempt to shut down debate. This thread has been incredibly good natured I think, there's been a lot of intelligent discussion and lots of food for thought. We don't all approach subjects with well thought out views, there's a process involved. Discussions like this thread are part of the process.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

co-op said:


> You meant "elements of some versions of trans* ideology", right?
> 
> Any version which simply takes existing gender roles and allows individuals to alter their own position in relations to those existing roles.


for the hard of thinking WHICH ELEMENTS, NOT WHICH VERSION


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

co-op said:


> You meant "elements of some versions of trans* ideology", right?
> 
> Any version which simply takes existing gender roles and allows individuals to alter their own position in relations to those existing roles.


Wtf has that got to do with making a comparison to "[dedication]to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists"?


----------



## Wilf (May 24, 2015)

co-op said:


> I wonder if this is because the British Army is a post-gender, post-patriarchical institution or if they find that adopting elements of some versions of trans* ideology is surprisingly easy for a right-wing reactionary institution dedicated to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists?


 What the fuck is that supposed to mean?


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> This just looks like an attempt to shut down debate. This thread has been incredibly good natured I think, there's been a lot of intelligent discussion and lots of food for thought. We don't all approach subjects with well thought out views, there's a process involved. Discussions like this thread are part of the process.


It's been mainly polite which is not the same as good natured.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> Wtf has that got to do with making a comparison to "[dedication]to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists"?


co-op's omnipresent, and not in a good way


----------



## Wilf (May 24, 2015)

Seriously co-op, I'd like to think that was some attempted clever comment that went wrong - please explain.


----------



## Blagsta (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's been mainly polite which is not the same as good natured.



True. Bad phrasing on my part.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Seriously co-op, I'd like to think that was some attempted clever comment that went wrong - please explain.


be careful what you wish for...


----------



## Citizen66 (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> But you appreciate that in the circumstances it's not likely that he'd come back to defend himself?



Awww, he'd have fun!


----------



## brogdale (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> *a bunch of cis people* *have got together* *- yet again - to argue the toss about what existence they are allowed to live.*
> 
> Bravo. One of your darkest moments, urban.



Utterly risible.

What you describe was actually a group of Urban posters, (of very differing levels of awareness, experience and consciousness) engaging in a discussion in which much was learnt.

Tool.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> I'm with cesare - this thread is the saddest I've read for a long time. It's opened my eyes to the things some people can believe while simultaneously being 'progressive' (thank you pickman's for teaching me fwoabt). I suppose that shouldn't be a surprise, considering for example the way some left-wing men can be when it comes to feminism. Why should it be any different for anything else?
> 
> I repeat my praise for Nigel's post. Any and all arguments around subversion/reinforcement of gender and gender roles (actually 2 different things) should end with a good read and understanding of that.
> 
> ...



So the answer is to shut down debate and condemn everyone for not being on the right page?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> I've got no idea about Facebook. If you have a problem with what he's posted there you should tell him there.



This is ironic given the thread topic started on Twitter.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> This is ironic given the thread topic started on Twitter.


Perhaps. But the over-riding point is that where ever it is that ***** is saying things that people don't agree with, they should address it to him there because it's unfair to do it here.


----------



## Belushi (May 24, 2015)

Outing posters is always out of order, even if they no longer post here.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> Perhaps. But the over-riding point is that where ever it is that Refused is saying things that people don't agree with, they should address it to him there because it's unfair to do it here.



Fair point. Although tbf it's you who is still discussing him.


----------



## Blagsta (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> Perhaps. But the over-riding point is that where ever it is that Refused is saying things that people don't agree with, they should address it to him there because it's unfair to do it here.



Personally, I think it's OK to mention that someone somewhere else is being an arse, if it's an argument that people from here are also involved in. 

Outing someone publically is not ok.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Fair point. Although tbf it's you who is still discussing him.


I'm not. I'm replying to you.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> I'm not. I'm replying to you.



Which was in reply to you.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Which was in reply to you.


Which was in reply to the outing of *******.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> Which was in reply to the outing of Refused.



I don't think I'm going to win this.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I don't think I'm going to win this.


The Dawkins meme occurs to me.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> The Dawkins meme occurs to me.



No Facebook.


----------



## seventh bullet (May 24, 2015)

I'm sorry for saying it was him, or did someone do it before me?  Whatever, I shouldn't have done it, if he comes back here (which I doubt, and I never knew about the racism).  I'm not going over there, though, with all the posh kids.


----------



## co-op (May 24, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Seriously co-op, I'd like to think that was some attempted clever comment that went wrong - please explain.



It was answering a post that seemed to me to suggest that the British Army was more progressive than anyone with ??my opinions, so was pointing out that wasn't necessarily a great piece of evidence for progressiveness.

If it's being taken that I think trans people are in some way crazy capitalist war-mongers and driving an ideology that supports that, then that is completely a wrong interpretation - and I hope that my other posts on this thread would be evidence for that.


----------



## co-op (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's been mainly polite which is not the same as good natured.



But imo it's on the good-natured end of the spectrum for (a) the delicacy of the subject, (b) the strength of emotional content and (c) that it's being conducted on a bulletin board with all the risks of mis-reading, grandstanding, minor careless use of language etc that makes it a high-risk subject.


----------



## likesfish (May 24, 2015)

co-op said:


> It was answering a post that seemed to me to suggest that the British Army was more progressive than anyone with ??my opinions, so was pointing out that wasn't necessarily a great piece of evidence for progressiveness.
> 
> If it's being taken that I think trans people are in some way crazy capitalist war-mongers and driving an ideology that supports that, then that is completely a wrong interpretation - and I hope that my other posts on this thread would be evidence for that.



no the thing is the British army (about as far from progressive as you could hope to get) has less problems with trans people than people who claim to be progressive and feminist who you'd kind of expect to be on the side of trans people seeing as being murdered for being trans is still a thing


----------



## Wilf (May 24, 2015)

co-op said:


> It was answering a post that seemed to me to suggest that the British Army was more progressive than anyone with ??my opinions, so was pointing out that wasn't necessarily a great piece of evidence for progressiveness.
> 
> If it's being taken that I think trans people are in some way crazy capitalist war-mongers and driving an ideology that supports that, then that is completely a wrong interpretation - and I hope that my other posts on this thread would be evidence for that.


But that's missing the bit that I - and I suspect others - had a problem with. You said:


> or if they find that adopting elements of some versions of trans* ideology is surprisingly easy for a right-wing reactionary institution dedicated to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists?


The question remains: why do you think a pro-capitalist military might find it 'surprisingly easy' to adopt a version of trans ideology?  You made that suggestion, you seem to be suggesting that is what has happened.  What is it about this version of trans ideology that is so compatible with the military in your view?


----------



## CNT36 (May 24, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> This just looks like an attempt to shut down debate. This thread has been incredibly good natured I think, there's been a lot of intelligent discussion and lots of food for thought. We don't all approach subjects with well thought out views, there's a process involved. Discussions like this thread are part of the process.


I think what you say is correct for most of the thread. From reading the thread it seems most people have learnt something or at least engaged with differing viewpoints which is probably the point of a politics board. There is a process and that is one of the things that I think a lot intersectionality types miss. People need to learn. Unless you are trans, close to someone who is, an activist, academic or organising safe spaces how often does it come up? If someone doesn't understand or thinks they do but are willing to listen, is the best things to do throw abuse about them being exclusionary or whatever? I get that it is not right for people to have to explain their life choices to everyone in every situation for example the asshole at a talk at local feminist group recently who expected the members to explain the history of feminism to them rather than engage with the issues of the talk but calling yourself an activist and talking publicly and then refusing to engage with people who haven't already reached the same conclusions as you seems like a dead end but a good way to score points.


----------



## Sea Star (May 24, 2015)

A lot of people still thinking trans is about dressing, appearance and behaviour when it is actually about a deep seated part of personal identity that cannot be changed.

I dressed and behaved as a woman for a long time before transitioning but as i was still idebtifying as and being identified as a man it did nothing to hold off my self hate and disconnect.

Cis people who are happy to be called male or female exactly as described on their birth certificate also have gender identity that they first became aware of around age 4 but because its in sync with and not in collison with their physical self they dont realise.

Gender dysphoria is only something that happens to people who are trans and therefore only we understand, so its shocking that so many people wont listen to us.

A prevalent tactic by TE feminists is to claim that it is a male strategy to undermine feminism is undermined by the fact that trans is experienced by men and women equally, and that we mostly have remarkably similar experiences.

And what next - are we going to discuss whether homosexuality is a real thing, a confidence trick a delusion or mental illness?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> You say this, but you're vehemently defending your right to be a 'real' woman, saying there is something inherent and essential about it. At the same time as saying transwomen shouldn't want to be women because it's essentialist.
> 
> This tactic is old and transparent and very frustrating.



Not least because essentialising or naturalising a characteristic is an act of concretising "it means this, and nothing else", when we're in constant evolution socio-culturally - what a "real woman" is, is constantly changing.
If I were bloody-minded, I'd point out to trans-exclusionary folk that essentialism isn't evolutionary or revolutionary, it's reactionary and conservative.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 24, 2015)

co-op said:


> If there is ever a need for "women only spaces" (and maybe you disagree with that?) then defining who is allowed into those spaces is pretty important to women don't you think?



Sure.
Who gets to do the defining, though - all women, or just those that shout loudest and/or longest?


----------



## co-op (May 24, 2015)

Wilf said:


> The question remains: why do you think a pro-capitalist military might find it 'surprisingly easy' to adopt a version of trans ideology?  You made that suggestion, you seem to be suggesting that is what has happened.  What is it about this version of trans ideology that is so compatible with the military in your view?



Because there's a version of trans ideology that says men and women are quintessentially different from each other but that some individuals are born in the wrong body - ergo, change the body and the contradiction ends, no other (social or political) changes necessary. The Army obviously doesn't have any problem with this.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 24, 2015)

co-op said:


> I wonder if this is because the British Army is a post-gender, post-patriarchical institution or if they find that adopting elements of some versions of trans* ideology is surprisingly easy for a right-wing reactionary institution dedicated to killing people on behalf of wealthy capitalists?



Can't it be both?


----------



## Red Cat (May 24, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> A lot of people still thinking trans is about dressing, appearance and behaviour when it is actually about a deep seated part of personal identity that cannot be changed.



A lot of people on here?

I described my behaviour and my dress as an 8 year old to relate an experience of difficulty with my gender but I made it clear that this wasn't the same as an experience of feeling like I was in the wrong body, it wasn't an equation I was making.

But you're saying that its not a continuum, but something qualitatively different?


----------



## co-op (May 24, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> But you're saying that its not a continuum, but something qualitatively different?



For me this is the question.


----------



## Sea Star (May 24, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> A lot of people on here?
> 
> I described my behaviour and my dress as an 8 year old to relate an experience of difficulty with my gender but I made it clear that this wasn't the same as an experience of feeling like I was in the wrong body, it wasn't an equation I was making.
> 
> But you're saying that its not a continuum, but something qualitatively different?


I havent actually read your post and i havent got time to now. And my post was not directed at you but to those having the academic discussion about trans without including the experiences of trans people.

Edit - answered part of your point below


----------



## co-op (May 24, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> And what next - are we going to discuss whether homosexuality is a real thing, a confidence trick a delusion or mental illness?



AS I don't know if you have me on ignore but I feel that this comment ^^ is unfair and nothing that has been posted on this thread could be taken as a step towards this position.

In fact one of the most (state/official ideological) homophobic countries in the world - Iran - is also one of the most transphile, since transitioning is seen as the "cure" for homosexuality. Ops are state-funded (allegedly, even forced).

But there's absolutely no way I would start suggesting that anyone putting forward a binary gender position is arguing in favour of this kind of madness - even though it's absolutely consistent with the concept of gender dysphoria etc.


----------



## Sea Star (May 24, 2015)

emanymton said:


> On a separate note someone with more knowledge on the subject might be able to help me out here.
> 
> Most of the discussion of trans* people is male to female. Is this because it is more common than female to male and if so why?Or does it just dominate discussion and again if so why?



I believe that f to m is just something that trans exclusionists would prefer not to acknowledge. I actually know more ftMs than mtfs and discussions I've had with fTm friends about their trans experience lead to me concluding it is the same in men and women.

Ftms tend to find that they can transition with less attention and generally receive less abuse and tend to pass better after hormones and surgery.

They're kind of invisible even though latest estimates are that there is no gender difference in numbers of trans people


----------



## Sea Star (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> so would you be happy to exclude a born woman socialised as a male from a woman's group, or to include a trans woman socialised as female?


And there's a strong argument that trans kids aren't socialised as either gender because they are so keen to reject one and unable to embrace the other. 
Also I had this discussion with a cis feminist friend of mine and I blithely trotted out the socialised as a male line and she said, well, how were you socialised as a male? 

And it's true - all attempts to turn me into a man failed utterly. Probably helped by the fact that I am autistic.


----------



## Sea Star (May 24, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> But you're saying that its not a continuum, but something qualitatively different?



Yes it's different. I've see trans women who seem perfectly happy with "male stuff" and fit in with male friends. I didn't do too badly as a man for twenty years.

Lots of cis men are happy being not at all male in a stereotypical sense and vice versa for many cis women.

So these people transition and are continue to follow same pursuits as before - loads of trans women like sport and do "manly" pursuits through choice as do many cis women - this is not what I'm talking about. This is not trans. It  is a continuum - gender identity and gender identity are both continuum but they are two different continuums and don't necessarily completely match up in an individual. Mainly because gender expression is a construct but gender identity isn't.


----------



## likesfish (May 24, 2015)

possibly the army just see's the trans person as a person and a soldier so if they can still do the job then transformation is not a huge problem.
  but then the British army doesn't  get hung up on theory and couldnt give a monkeys about your oppression or not just can you do the job you signed up to do.


----------



## Red Cat (May 24, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Yes it's different. I've see trans women who seem perfectly happy with "male stuff" and fit in with male friends. I didn't do too badly as a man for twenty years.
> 
> Lots of cis men are happy being not at all male in a stereotypical sense and vice versa for many cis women.
> 
> So these people transition and are continue to follow same pursuits as before - loads of trans women like sport and do "manly" pursuits through choice as do many cis women - this is not what I'm talking about. This is not trans. It  is a continuum - gender identity and gender identity are both continuum but they are two different continuums and don't necessarily completely match up in an individual. Mainly because gender expression is a construct but gender identity isn't.



I wasn't really talking about the choice, or lack of it, to pursue what are seen as gendered activities, I was referring to the existence of varying degrees of identity confusion in relation to gender.


----------



## Sea Star (May 24, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> I wasn't really talking about the choice, or lack of it, to pursue what are seen as gendered activities, I was referring to the existence of varying degrees of identity confusion in relation to gender.


I've never been confused. I've always been pretty certain i am female.


----------



## Vintage Paw (May 24, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> This just looks like an attempt to shut down debate. This thread has been incredibly good natured I think, there's been a lot of intelligent discussion and lots of food for thought. We don't all approach subjects with well thought out views, there's a process involved. Discussions like this thread are part of the process.



It's not an attempt to shut down anything. It's a reaction to what I've read. I suppose it's easy to think something is interesting and good natured and in good faith if it's not your existence under the microscope.


----------



## Blagsta (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> It's not an attempt to shut down anything. It's a reaction to what I've read. I suppose it's easy to think something is interesting and good natured and in good faith if it's not your existence under the microscope.



The discussion has been respectful IMO. I do understand how it may also be uncomfortable for some people. Is that a reason to not discuss things? How else do opinions get challenged without some uncomfortable discussion?


----------



## Red Cat (May 24, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I've never been confused. I've always been pretty certain i am female.



I was going to edit my post because I understand that you don't feel confused.


----------



## Vintage Paw (May 24, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> The discussion has been respectful IMO. I do understand how it may also be uncomfortable for some people. Is that a reason to not discuss things? How else do opinions get challenged without some uncomfortable discussion?



I agree. I have no problem with discussion. That doesn't mean I can't say I find it terribly sad the way it goes, that I find some of those opinions frustrating or maddening. That I'm incredibly sad by some of the people I've seen expressing some of the views. And maybe this is where we will have to disagree, but to me a gentle tone of voice (or tone of writing, idk) isn't the same thing as someone being respectful. The lack of a proper bun fight doesn't mean what someone is saying isn't offensive - willfully so in at least one case on here. In my opinion. Of course.


----------



## Blagsta (May 24, 2015)

Fairynuff


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> I agree. I have no problem with discussion. That doesn't mean I can't say I find it terribly sad the way it goes, that I find some of those opinions frustrating or maddening. That I'm incredibly sad by some of the people I've seen expressing some of the views. And maybe this is where we will have to disagree, but to me a gentle tone of voice (or tone of writing, idk) isn't the same thing as someone being respectful. The lack of a proper bun fight doesn't mean what someone is saying isn't offensive - willfully so in at least one case on here. In my opinion. Of course.


in the good auld days there'd have been at least one banning by this point.


----------



## Red Cat (May 24, 2015)

AuntiStella regarding my use of the term identity confusion. 

Not sure this is clearer even though it's taken me ages to think of another way of saying it. I was trying to convey something about some sense of conflict, as opposed to a sense of being happy with, that some cis people may feel with regards their gender identity. I didn't want to suggest that trans* was at one end of a continuum of uncertainty, although that is what I actually did end up implying.  

But I'm going to leave it there for the moment. I feel that trying to be clearer is actually muddying things in an unhelpful way and there isn't a point that I want to make in any case.


----------



## Sea Star (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> I agree. I have no problem with discussion. That doesn't mean I can't say I find it terribly sad the way it goes, that I find some of those opinions frustrating or maddening. That I'm incredibly sad by some of the people I've seen expressing some of the views. And maybe this is where we will have to disagree, but to me a gentle tone of voice (or tone of writing, idk) isn't the same thing as someone being respectful. The lack of a proper bun fight doesn't mean what someone is saying isn't offensive - willfully so in at least one case on here. In my opinion. Of course.


On twitter, on blogs and in printed media i have been told i am a misogynist man over and over. While most of it was polite i was still sent into a spiral of depression and anxiety - no discussion on trans can start constructively from the premise that a trans woman is really a man. Ive learnt now to talk to those who respect my identity and to ignore the minority who dont.


----------



## Sea Star (May 24, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> AuntiStella regarding my use of the term identity confusion.
> 
> Not sure this is clearer even though it's taken me ages to think of another way of saying it. I was trying to convey something about some sense of conflict, as opposed to a sense of being happy with, that some cis people may feel with regards their gender identity. I didn't want to suggest that trans* was at one end of a continuum of uncertainty, although that is what I actually did end up implying.
> 
> But I'm going to leave it there for the moment. I feel that trying to be clearer is actually muddying things in an unhelpful way and there isn't a point that I want to make in any case.


Ok - sorry i cant help. It took me years to untangle my gender identity after 20 years of suppressing it so i know its far from straight forward. I cant define you as trans or cis or other - only you can do that.


----------



## Red Cat (May 24, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Ok - sorry i cant help. It took me years to untangle my gender identity after 20 years of suppressing it so i know its far from straight forward. I cant define you as trans or cis or other - only you can do that.



Thanks, but I wasn't asking for your help! I was having a political discussion, not describing a personal issue I'm having difficulty with.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> Thanks, but I wasn't asking for your help! I was having a political discussion, not describing a personal issue I'm having difficulty with.


a political discussion? in politics? well i never!


----------



## Sea Star (May 24, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> Thanks, but I wasn't asking for your help! I was having a political discussion, not describing a personal issue I'm having difficulty with.


Ok - I have n fucking idea what you're on about then. 

And I don't see how my gender identity is at all political.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> I agree. I have no problem with discussion. That doesn't mean I can't say I find it terribly sad the way it goes, that I find some of those opinions frustrating or maddening. That I'm incredibly sad by some of the people I've seen expressing some of the views. And maybe this is where we will have to disagree, but to me a gentle tone of voice (or tone of writing, idk) isn't the same thing as someone being respectful. The lack of a proper bun fight doesn't mean what someone is saying isn't offensive - willfully so in at least one case on here. In my opinion. Of course.



What is wrong with being offensive?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> What is wrong with being offensive?


it offends people.


----------



## Sea Star (May 24, 2015)

I think I shared this before but it almost sent me over the edge a few months ago 
https://stoptranschauvinism.wordpre...sbians-who-know-transwomen-are-male-are-vile/


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> What is wrong with being offensive?


You need to hold that thought in case you do any more pro bono employment work e.g. Discrimination on the grounds of gender.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Discrimination is very different from being offensive.

They are largely unrelated.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Discrimination is very different from being offensive.
> 
> They are largely unrelated.


They are related by detriment.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Discrimination is very different from being offensive.
> 
> They are largely unrelated.


are you sure no one finds discrimination offensive?


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> You need to hold that thought in case you do any more pro bono employment work e.g. Discrimination on the grounds of gender.



I thought that we all had come to some sort of understanding that we wouldn't mention my pro bono work any further because some people found it so very tiresome.

But now that you have brought it up I think I am justified in stating that I am working on an employment harassment case right now.

In fact I will spend the rest of today and most of tomorrow on it.  Hopeless case mind...


----------



## Red Cat (May 24, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Ok - I have n fucking idea what you're on about then.
> 
> And I don't see how my gender identity is at all political.



I wasn't talking about your gender identity, I was talking about mine, and then more generally (i.e. politically).


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> They are related by detriment.



Almost everything you do, every single day is detrimental.

Entropy?


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I thought that we all had come to some sort of understanding that we wouldn't mention my pro bono work any further because some people found it so very tiresome.
> 
> But now that you have brought it up I think I am justified in stating that I am working on an employment harassment case right now.
> 
> In fact I will spend the rest of today and most of tomorrow on it.  Hopeless case mind...


If you're working on a harassment case right now I'm very surprised that you're asking what's wrong with offensiveness in this context - because if you don't understand how offensive comments on the grounds of one of the protected characteristics can create an environment that's demeaning and humiliating for the recipient, I doubt you're going to be much assistance to your client. On the other hand you may just have been trolling.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> If you're working on a harassment case right now I'm very surprised that you're asking what's wrong with offensiveness in this context - because if you don't understand how offensive comments on the grounds of one of the protected characteristics can create an environment that's demeaning and humiliating for the recipient, I doubt you're going to be much assistance to your client. On the other hand you may just have been trolling.


(((diamond's client)))


----------



## equationgirl (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Discrimination is very different from being offensive.
> 
> They are largely unrelated.


As someone who has been on the receiving end of gender discrimination I beg to differ.

You have no right to be acting as an employment lawyer if you do not understand how the two are related.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> If you're working on a harassment case right now I'm very surprised that you're asking what's wrong with offensiveness in this context - because if you don't understand how offensive comments on the grounds of one of the protected characteristics can create an environment that's demeaning and humiliating for the recipient, I doubt you're going to be much assistance to your client. On the other hand you may just have been trolling.



Truly staggering pomposity


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> As someone who has been on the receiving end of gender discrimination I beg to differ.
> 
> You have no right to be acting as an employment lawyer if you do not understand how the two are related.



Are you a qualified lawyer?

(please ignore the pun..)


----------



## equationgirl (May 24, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I think I shared this before but it almost sent me over the edge a few months ago
> https://stoptranschauvinism.wordpre...sbians-who-know-transwomen-are-male-are-vile/


I'm not surprised,  it's vile and hateful and deliberately insulting. 

As far as I am concerned you are as much a woman as I am X


----------



## killer b (May 24, 2015)

Truly staggering.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Truly staggering pomposity


http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/...u-are-managed/avoiding-and-dealing-harassment

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/26


----------



## equationgirl (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Are you a qualified lawyer?
> 
> (please ignore the pun..)


No, but I have more understanding about discrimination and protected characteristics than you clearly do.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> No, but I have more understanding about discrimination and protected characteristics than you clearly do.



You're entitled to your opinion but it is wrong.

No doubt your sense of entitlement will provide a warm blanket by way of respite.


----------



## killer b (May 24, 2015)

I think pandering to diamond's fantasy world is probably not the best idea, on reflection.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

killer b said:


> I think pandering to diamond's fantasy world is probably not the best idea, on reflection.


diamond's fantasy world is the one in which he's respected


----------



## equationgirl (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> You're entitled to your opinion but it is wrong.
> 
> No doubt your sense of entitlement will provide a warm blanket by way of respite.


As your sense of superiority clearly does. Don't you have a case to work on? You obviously have a lot to do...


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 24, 2015)

Why is everyone so negative and dismissive about Diamond doing pro bono work? That's a good thing to be doing surely?


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> As your sense of superiority clearly does. Don't you have a case to work on? You obviously have a lot to do...



I'm on my way home from watching the Gooners spank West Brom so I have time to swat away your weak repartee but, yes, when I arrive I will try and build a case for my client, if possible.


----------



## killer b (May 24, 2015)

I think people are mainly dismissive of its existence rather than pro-bono work per se, nance.


----------



## equationgirl (May 24, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Why is everyone so negative and dismissive about Diamond doing pro bono work? That's a good thing to be doing surely?


Pro bono work is a good thing, diamond misunderstanding the law around which his client's case will be argued, not so much.

I prefer my lawyers to know what they're doing, pro bono or otherwise.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 24, 2015)

Solicitors in the UK. Lawyers are American.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Solicitors in the UK. Lawyers are American.


i was watching s.1 ep.3 of the shield earlier in which there was a sticker on a door: "no solicitors"


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I'm on my way home from watching the Gooners spank West Brom so I have time to swat away your weak repartee but, yes, when I arrive I will try and build a case for my client, if possible.


and when you've finished that you could turn to the rather more daunting task of trying to build a case for yourself.


----------



## brogdale (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> and when you've finished that you could turn to the rather more daunting task of trying to build a case for yourself.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> and when you've finished that you could turn to the rather more daunting task of trying to build a case for yourself.


He's probably going to interpret that as needing to present his case to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal some time soon


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> and when you've finished that you could turn to the rather more daunting task of trying to build a case for yourself.



That does not mean anything.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> He's probably going to interpret that as needing to present his case to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal some time soon


not quite, as it turned out.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> not quite, as it turned out.


True.


----------



## brogdale (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> That does not mean anything.


Post of the week contender.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> That does not mean anything.


yes. it's this sort of slipshod shite which i - and i expect others - associate with you. there's none of the evidence of logical procedure in your contributions which i would expect from the trained legal mind, but a load of auld crap which the callowest newbie should be ashamed of.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> He's probably going to interpret that as needing to present his case to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal some time soon


i'm surprised they aren't on first name terms with him.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yes. it's this sort of slipshod shite which i - and i expect others - associate with you. there's none of the evidence of logical procedure in your contributions which i would expect from the trained legal mind, but a load of auld crap which the callowest newbie should be ashamed of.


Maybe he's still in the taxi and didn't read it properly etc


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> Maybe he's still in the taxi and didn't read it properly etc


maybe he did read it properly but couldn't comprehend it.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm surprised they aren't on first name terms with him.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm surprised they aren't on first name terms with him.


Cards at Christmas


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> maybe he did read it properly but couldn't comprehend it.


Or maybe he assumed you were being careless with your language.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> Cards at Christmas


yeh regular as clockwork they want to see him early in january for another transgression


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> Or maybe he assumed you were being careless with your language.


unfortunately for a professional pedant, diamond doesn't understand things as well as he thinks he does.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> unfortunately for a professional pedant, diamond doesn't understand things as well as he thinks he does.


As evidenced in the concurrent manslaughter/self defence thread. If only he were as avid in his defence of marginalised and excluded people to the extent of supporting them on this thread rather than latterly cynically using it as a vehicle for obtaining the necessary legal references without putting in the work required.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> As evidenced in the concurrent manslaughter/self defence thread. If only he were as avid in his defence of marginalised and excluded people to the extent of supporting them on this thread rather than latterly cynically using it as a vehicle for obtaining the necessary legal references without putting in the work required.


perhaps if he read law books instead of just dusting them now and again he'd be in a position to offer an informed opinion.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps if he read law books instead of just dusting them now and again he'd be in a position to offer an informed opinion.


I doubt he's got the green book to hand but google is his friend.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> I doubt he's got the green book to hand but google is his friend.


i didn't know he was that way inclined


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i didn't know he was that way inclined


I didn't mean that green book


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> I didn't mean that green book


the full text of this one readily available online too


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> the full text of this one readily available online too


----------



## stethoscope (May 24, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> And I don't see how my gender identity is at all political.



Gender is certainly a political issue. What takes the piss is that trans peoples experiences and sense of sex/gender and bodies are constantly held up for more deconstruction and criticism, whilst regularly asserted to be less valid ('real') than cis peoples - all the fucking time and to a degree which most cis people don't ever have to deal with. Trans women particularly then get exposed to daily cis-sexism too - wear jeans and hoody 'she's a man/not trying hard enough', wear a dress 'she's reinforcing patriarchal notions of feminity', dare to speak up and call cis people out 'that's male privilege/socialisation'.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Ok - I have n fucking idea what you're on about then.
> 
> And I don't see how my gender identity is at all political.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Well this has all become a very cosy circle jerk in my brief absence.

Do carry on with your auto-stimulation folks, it's highly amusing.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> Pro bono work is a good thing, diamond misunderstanding the law around which his client's case will be argued, not so much.
> 
> I prefer my lawyers to know what they're doing, pro bono or otherwise.



On what basis do you make that assessment?


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Why is everyone so negative and dismissive about Diamond doing pro bono work? That's a good thing to be doing surely?



This bit mystifies me as well.

People seem to take much more personal offence to the fact that I work pro bono than if I insulted them directly.

Perhaps it's because they are lazy eejits who, deep down, know that they could and should be doing much more than sniping on a bulletin board but lack the motivation/conviction/talent/appetite to do anything else but mutter bad words from afar...


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Anyways, we know how averse the editor is to my talk of pro bono so how about we drop that now?


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

I was about to say that Diamond was possibly deliberately and successfully drawing fire from AuntiStella in an act of solidarity but I may have been mistaken.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Anyways, we know how averse the editor is to my talk of pro bono so how about we drop that now?


it's that you whine about it, you drivel on about it, you fart about it. it's getting dull.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> I was about to say that Diamond was possibly deliberately and successfully drawing fire from AuntiStella in an act of solidarity but I may have been mistaken.



?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> ?


how nice to find you, for once, lost for words.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> it's that you whine about it, you drivel on about it, you fart about it. it's getting dull.



I don't do any of the above.

You, clearly, get fucked off about it.

Do I give a toss that a self-satisfied martinet like you gets wound up?

Yes, it's one of the highlights of the role...


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> ?


Benefit of the doubt together with ascribing you with laudable motivations.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I don't do any of the above.
> 
> You, clearly, get fucked off about it.
> 
> ...


every morning when i wake up i thank god i do not have to rely on your representation. and i pray for those who do.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> every morning when i wake up i thank god i do not have to rely on your representation. and i pray for those who do.



You pray?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> You pray?


if they have to rely on you, they'd better hope there's a deity out there somewhere to help them.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 24, 2015)

Tbh if the only problem people have with Diamond is that he says he does pro bono work (that's representing someone as a lawyer without charging right?) then I think the witch hunt could be called off. It's a good thing to be doing, and it's giving something back, and you might think he shouldn't mention it or boast about it (if he has) but if that's the most of peoples problem with him then this is pretty unpleasant mob stuff. I suspect it's just cos he's a lawyer full stop. And I dunno how justified that is?


----------



## alfajobrob (May 24, 2015)




----------



## Vintage Paw (May 24, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Tbh if the only problem people have with Diamond is that he says he does pro bono work (that's representing someone as a lawyer without charging right?) then I think the witch hunt could be called off. It's a good thing to be doing, and it's giving something back, and you might think he shouldn't mention it or boast about it (if he has) but if that's the most of peoples problem with him then this is pretty unpleasant mob stuff. I suspect it's just cos he's a lawyer full stop. And I dunno how justified that is?



It seems to me, in this thread at least (I'm not familiar with any other interactions) it's his work on anti-discrimination when he defends the right to cause offence that is the root of the ire.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Tbh if the only problem people have with Diamond is that he says he does pro bono work (that's representing someone as a lawyer without charging right?) then I think the witch hunt could be called off. It's a good thing to be doing, and it's giving something back, and you might think he shouldn't mention it or boast about it (if he has) but if that's the most of peoples problem with him then this is pretty unpleasant mob stuff. I suspect it's just cos he's a lawyer full stop. And I dunno how justified that is?



Don't worry about me.

I have a pretty thick skin and these muppets are many miles away from puncturing it.


----------



## Spymaster (May 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Solicitors in the UK. Lawyers are American.



Nah.

Solicitors here, attorneys there, lawyers everywhere.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> It seems to me, in this thread at least (I'm not familiar with any other interactions) it's his work on anti-discrimination when he defends the right to cause offence that is the root of the ire.



That does not really make sense.  Do you care to make it out more clearly?


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> Nah.
> 
> Solicitors here, attorneys there, lawyers everywhere.



And bastards everywhere apparently...


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> And bastards everywhere apparently...


Haven't you got work to do? Section 26 is your starting point.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> Haven't you got work to do? Section 26 is your starting point.



The starting point is talking to my client not a book, but you probably wouldn't get that because you don't really get anything.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> The starting point is talking to my client not a book, but you probably wouldn't get that because you dont really get anything.


You haven't talked to your client yet but you've already said it's a hopeless case? Blimey.


----------



## Wilf (May 24, 2015)

alfajobrob said:


>


Which one is Bono?


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

cesare said:


> You haven't talked to your client yet but you've already said it's a hopeless case? Blimey.



I have met her twice in person and she has two matters to address.  One is dim, the other slightly brighter, but you follow your client's instructions nonetheless.

That's sort of how the whole law thing works.

But, let me guess, you have no idea what you are talking about...


----------



## killer b (May 24, 2015)

Well, I'm glad this thread has turned into another one about Diamond's glittering career.


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I have met her twice in person and she has two matters to address.  One is dim, the other slightly brighter, but you follow your client's instructions nonetheless.
> 
> That's sort of how the whole law thing works.
> 
> But, let me guess, you have no idea what you are talking about...



And there was me thinking that the whole law thing worked on knowing the law.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (May 24, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> It seems to me, in this thread at least (I'm not familiar with any other interactions) it's his work on anti-discrimination when he defends the right to cause offence that is the root of the ire.


I think he defended the right to be offensive in the context of discussing politics. Not to discriminate. There's been plenty of support for the right to be offensive on urban before (Charlie Hebdo).

Or have I misread. May of. Knackered.


----------



## Diamond (May 24, 2015)

killer b said:


> Well, I'm glad this thread has turned into another one about Diamond's glittering career.



Yeah, I'm going to duck out from yet another thread because it has turned into a predictable vehicle.

Ciao folks!


----------



## cesare (May 24, 2015)

(((Diamond)))


----------



## newbie (May 25, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> And I don't see how my gender identity is at all political.



It's political because your own, individual, identification potentially has effects on other people.  An assertion that there is no effect, or that there shouldn't be, is a political statement, a narrow expression of the wider '_ain't no such thing as society_'.  Rejecting the wide does not necessarily mean rejecting the narrow, but the questions it raises are political ones.


----------



## editor (May 25, 2015)

If there's any more pro bono talk, pro banno may follow-o.


----------



## co-op (May 25, 2015)

stethoscope said:


> What takes the piss is that trans peoples experiences and sense of sex/gender and bodies are constantly held up for more deconstruction and criticism, whilst regularly asserted to be less valid ('real') than cis peoples



Do you think anyone on this thread has asserted that trans peoples' experiences and sense of sex/gender are less valid or less real than anyone elses? I really haven't seen that.


----------



## Athos (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Yeah, I'm going to duck out from yet another thread because it has turned into a predictable vehicle.
> 
> Ciao folks!



As I said when you made a similar comment on the manslaughter/self-defence thread:



Athos said:


> Why do you it keeps happening?  Something about you?  Or about everyone else?


----------



## cesare (May 25, 2015)

co-op said:


> Do you think anyone on this thread has asserted that trans peoples' experiences and sense of sex/gender are less valid or less real than anyone elses? I really haven't seen that.


----------



## The39thStep (May 25, 2015)

Has she gone yet?


----------



## krink (May 25, 2015)

Who would be pro bono?I hate him.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2015)

krink said:


> Who would be pro bono?I hate him.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 25, 2015)

editor said:


> If there's any more pro bono talk, pro banno may follow-o.



It was other people bringing it up.


----------



## cesare (May 25, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It was other people bringing it up.


I think this is a general warning that everyone's got to say free instead.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2015)

cesare said:


> I think this is a general warning that everyone's got to say free instead.


won't be free if diamond cocks it up and gets sued. i'd like to think that's beyond the realms of possibility but i don't think it is.


----------



## cesare (May 25, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> won't be free if diamond cocks it up and gets sued. i'd like to think that's beyond the realms of possibility but i don't think it is.


SRA Indemnity Insurance innit


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2015)

cesare said:


> SRA Indemnity Insurance innit


won't help him if he gets struck off


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 25, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Ok - I have n fucking idea what you're on about then.
> 
> And I don't see how my gender identity is at all political.



Everything is political, and as that twat Marshall McLuhan was so fond of saying, "the personal is political".


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2015)

kabbes http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...icer-facing-sack.335058/page-22#post-13906516 any chance of an answer?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 25, 2015)

stethoscope said:


> Gender is certainly a political issue. What takes the piss is that trans peoples experiences and sense of sex/gender and bodies are constantly held up for more deconstruction and criticism...



And not just in the media, in academe too. Trans studies as a separate "discipline" to gender studies seems to be an up-and-coming field in the way that disability studies was 25 years ago. As with disability studies, I'm ambivalent about whether it's a good or a bad thing to happen. It sheds light, but sometimes it does so by throwing fuel on the fire.
I suppose the social model of disability (that society disables) could be applied to form a "social model of trans", as again it's wider society and the state that ostracises or invalidates the individual and the community, not the central fact of their identity - being trans. 



> whilst regularly asserted to be less valid ('real') than cis peoples - all the fucking time and to a degree which most cis people don't ever have to deal with. Trans women particularly then get exposed to daily cis-sexism too - wear jeans and hoody 'she's a man/not trying hard enough', wear a dress 'she's reinforcing patriarchal notions of feminity', dare to speak up and call cis people out 'that's male privilege/socialisation'.



Unfortunately, that seems to be life for most minorities - whatever you do is open to question and contingent in ways that the utterances and actions of people who conform to "normative" standards rarely are. This makes it much easier to shut someone from a minority down.
What is pernicious (IMO) for trans people is that little social and legal debate has taken place that validates trans *to the majority*, and this doesn't appear to have been because there's no utility to doing so, but because it would make waves in terms of power-relations, both individual and communal.

Hope that makes sense.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 25, 2015)

co-op said:


> Do you think anyone on this thread has asserted that trans peoples' experiences and sense of sex/gender are less valid or less real than anyone elses? I really haven't seen that.



Maybe not on here, but "out there"?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 25, 2015)

cesare said:


> SRA Indemnity Insurance innit



He has to indemnify himself against charges of Satanic Ritual Abuse?


----------



## SpineyNorman (May 25, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Tbh if the only problem people have with Diamond is that he says he does pro bono work (that's representing someone as a lawyer without charging right?) then I think the witch hunt could be called off. It's a good thing to be doing, and it's giving something back, and you might think he shouldn't mention it or boast about it (if he has) but if that's the most of peoples problem with him then this is pretty unpleasant mob stuff. I suspect it's just cos he's a lawyer full stop. And I dunno how justified that is?


I think it's just because he's a massive self satisfied cunt to be honest.


----------



## frogwoman (May 25, 2015)

stethoscope said:


> Gender is certainly a political issue. What takes the piss is that trans peoples experiences and sense of sex/gender and bodies are constantly held up for more deconstruction and criticism, whilst regularly asserted to be less valid ('real') than cis peoples - all the fucking time and to a degree which most cis people don't ever have to deal with. Trans women particularly then get exposed to daily cis-sexism too - wear jeans and hoody 'she's a man/not trying hard enough', wear a dress 'she's reinforcing patriarchal notions of feminity', dare to speak up and call cis people out 'that's male privilege/socialisation'.



 yep


----------



## equationgirl (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> On what basis do you make that assessment?


Your own posts. Obviously.


----------



## Diamond (May 25, 2015)

editor said:


> If there's any more pro bono talk, pro banno may follow-o.



Heelarious.  You would ban me because people give me shit for working pro bono?

Choice stuff and a real low for this board and its members...


----------



## equationgirl (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Heelarious.  You would ban me because people give me shit for working pro bono?
> 
> Choice stuff and a real low for this board and its members...


Most people getting a ban break the cardinal rule of urban 'don't be a dick', especially if one of the mods suggests they stop doing something and they carry on.

I suspect your repeated mention of doing certain work for free might well fall into this category, but I'm not a mod.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 25, 2015)

it was a joke based on eds long standing hatred of Bono out of U2


----------



## cesare (May 25, 2015)

#freediamond


----------



## brogdale (May 25, 2015)

cesare said:


> #freediamond


je suis diamant


----------



## DotCommunist (May 25, 2015)

we are all Diamond


----------



## cesare (May 25, 2015)

brogdale said:


> je suis diamant


Je suis diamant-libre


----------



## equationgirl (May 25, 2015)

Je voudrais beaucoup le diamant-libre.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2015)

je ne voudrais pas etre diamond


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

editor said:


> If there's any more pro bono talk, pro banno may follow-o.


People talk like he is saving the world but the wanker is a Tax dodger.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

Or is that Bonio


----------



## DotCommunist (May 25, 2015)

et tu adamas?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

Fuck knows


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

Je la habit en mason


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

Chein (dog)


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

Un doa tres catra cans ses


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> Chein (dog)


chien


----------



## tufty79 (May 25, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> Un doa tres catra cans ses


If only it stayed that easy.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

J mappel Bigmoaner


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

Chat (cat)


----------



## Diamond (May 25, 2015)

Youse are certainly all cosy


----------



## Santino (May 25, 2015)

Je suis toujours Onket


----------



## DotCommunist (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I'm Diamond!




no, I am Diamond!


----------



## brogdale (May 25, 2015)

geezer


----------



## fishfinger (May 25, 2015)

Un petit d'un petit
S'étonne aux Halles
Un petit d'un petit
Ah! degrés te fallent
Indolent qui ne sort cesse
Indolent qui ne se mène
Qu'importe un petit
Tout gai de Reguennes.


----------



## Diamond (May 25, 2015)

Anyone else going to join the roll call of morons?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

An attack on Diamond is a great big slap in the West's face.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 25, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> An attack on Diamond is a great big slap in the West's face.


the slap that rang out across the world

(seriously though Diamond , that wasn't a ban threat it was a joke, clearly)


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

If a plumber does free work can he call it pro bono work?


----------



## Diamond (May 25, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> People talk like he is saving the world but the wanker is a Tax dodger.



You might have evidence for an elision of those two words but not standalone, so to speak.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> An attack on Diamond is a great big slap in the West's face.


but no attack on d is a bigger harder slap on the west's face


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

Either way the West is fucked then


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> You might have evidence for an elision of those two words but not standalone, so to speak.


Not sure I follow that.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

An attack on Diamond is like putting the West in a headlock


----------



## J Ed (May 25, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> An attack on Diamond is like putting the West in a headlock



There is no headlock that the finest legal mind in Christendom cannot find his way out of just in time to watch his beloved soccer foot club!


----------



## Spymaster (May 25, 2015)

Thread is in freefall.


----------



## Athos (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Anyone else going to join the roll call of morons?



You lonely?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Youse are certainly all *cosy*



You meant *bijou* didn't you, say you did


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

J Ed said:


> There is no headlock that the finest legal mind in Christendom cannot find his way out of just in time to watch his beloved soccer foot club!


yes, yes, i have heard this too.


----------



## Sea Star (May 25, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Everything is political, and as that twat Marshall McLuhan was so fond of saying, "the personal is political".


It may be political but it's not up for debate!!


----------



## DotCommunist (May 25, 2015)

J Ed said:


> There is no headlock that the finest legal mind in Christendom cannot find his way out of just in time to watch his beloved soccer foot club!


When Diamond does press ups, he isn't pushing himself upwards, he's pushing the world downwards


----------



## Thimble Queen (May 25, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> we are all Diamond


----------



## Athos (May 25, 2015)

There is no such thing as history; there is only what Diamond allows you to know.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

Diamond doesn't wait for the train, the train waits for him FFS.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

to attack Diamond like the Editor is planning to do, is like dismantling Science bit by bit and putting it in landfill.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 25, 2015)

Is there anything else to talk about apart from urbanspats regarding Diamond?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Is there anything else to talk about apart from urbanspats regarding Diamond?


i think bannings is a perennial favourite topick here


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 25, 2015)

I mean. Look. It was pretty obvious that the original post was about wasting everybody's time banging on about Diamond which is absurdly irrelevant here. That Diamond seems to have taken that as a personal attack is... well, it's a thing. But why not talk about actual stuff?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 25, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> When Diamond does press ups, he isn't pushing himself upwards, he's pushing the world downwards



I thought that was Chuck "walks like a drunken gibbon" Norris?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I mean. Look. It was pretty obvious that the original post was about wasting everybody's time banging on about Diamond which is absurdly irrelevant here. That Diamond seems to have taken that as a personal attack is... well, it's a thing. But why not talk about actual stuff?


it's not the urban way


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 25, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Is there anything else to talk about apart from urbanspats regarding Diamond?



I suppose we could talk about the great postcount cull of 2004...


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 25, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not the urban way


The urban way is when the fascists shut a thread down because it's turned into slagging off an individual. Bastards. First against the wall ctr tbh.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The urban way is when the fascists shut a thread down because it's turned into slagging off an individual. Bastards. First against the wall ctr tbh.


second ityf


----------



## Diamond (May 25, 2015)

Would it help if I posted a picture of a cat?


----------



## BigMoaner (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Would it help if I posted a picture of a cat?


Not as far as I am aware.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 25, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The urban way is when the fascists shut a thread down because it's turned into slagging off an individual. Bastards. First against the wall ctr tbh.



Normally after pub closing time when people are being their most reasonable, I find.


----------



## equationgirl (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Would it help if I posted a picture of a cat?


At this stage it couldn't hurt...

Pics of serious cat preferred.


----------



## Diamond (May 25, 2015)

cesare said:


> I was about to say that Diamond was possibly deliberately and successfully drawing fire from AuntiStella in an act of solidarity but I may have been mistaken.



Hmm.. I haven't read the rest of the thread but I believe that AuntiStella's content was about being trans which rather lends your above post to be pretty dodgy on many different angles.

Could be mistaken but there seem to be insinuations on a number of different levels there.  None of them good reflections on the author, you.


----------



## equationgirl (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Hmm.. I haven't read the rest of the thread but I believe that AuntiStella's content was about being trans which rather lends your above post to be pretty dodgy on many different angles.
> 
> Could be mistaken but there seem to be insinuations on a number of different levels there.  None of them good reflections on the author, you.


So why, when the thread has calmed down and moved on, do you feel the need to stir things up again?

There was nothing wrong with what cesare posted. There were no insinuations other than what you're trying desperately to create.


----------



## Diamond (May 25, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> At this stage it couldn't hurt...
> 
> Pics of serious cat preferred.



Oh well, that didn't work as planned...


----------



## tufty79 (May 25, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> At this stage it couldn't hurt...
> 
> Pics of serious cat preferred.


Something like this?


----------



## Diamond (May 25, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> So why, when the thread has calmed down and moved on, do you feel the need to stir things up again?
> 
> There was nothing wrong with what cesare posted. There were no insinuations other than what you're trying desperately to create.



Calmed down and moved on?

Really?


----------



## DotCommunist (May 25, 2015)

No one would have believed in the last years of the nineteenth century that this world was being watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man's and yet as mortal as his own; Diamond minds, that as men busied themselves about their various concerns they were scrutinised and studied, perhaps almost as narrowly as a man with a microscope might scrutinise the transient creatures that swarm and multiply in a drop of water. With infinite complacency men went to and fro over this globe about their little affairs, serene in their assurance of their empire over matter. It is possible that the infusoria under the microscope do the same. No one gave a thought to the older worlds of space as sources of human danger, or thought of them only to dismiss the idea of life upon them as impossible or improbable. It is curious to recall some of the mental habits of those departed days. At most terrestrial men fancied there might be other men upon Mars, perhaps inferior to themselves and ready to welcome a missionary enterprise. Yet across the gulf of space, minds that are to our minds as ours are to those of the beasts that perish, intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, regarded this earth with envious eyes, and slowly and surely drew their plans against us


----------



## xslavearcx (May 25, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> I thought that was Chuck "walks like a drunken gibbon" Norris?


Chuck Norris- poor mans Steven seagal


----------



## equationgirl (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Calmed down and moved on?
> 
> Really?


Yes, really.


----------



## Diamond (May 25, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> Yes, really.



Show that.


----------



## equationgirl (May 25, 2015)

Nice war of the world's homage DotCommunist


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Show that.



cesare 's post was 1448...yours quoting her in a concerned fashion is 1552....why wait so long?


----------



## Diamond (May 25, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> cesare 's post was 1448...yours quoting her in a concerned fashion is 1552....why wait so long?



I was not aware that the doctrine of laches applied to urban75.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 25, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I was not aware that the doctrine of laches applied to urban75.



*yawn

Case dismissed.


----------



## equationgirl (May 26, 2015)

Why did you wait so long Diamond?


----------



## Diamond (May 26, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> Why did you wait so long Diamond?



Because I had other stuff to do.

Or is this all you have?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Hmm.. I haven't read the rest of the thread but I believe that AuntiStella's content was about being trans which rather lends your above post to be pretty dodgy on many different angles.
> 
> Could be mistaken but there seem to be insinuations on a number of different levels there.  None of them good reflections on the author, you.


It's clear that you haven't read the rest of the thread, otherwise you wouldn't have just posted that.


----------



## equationgirl (May 26, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Because I had other stuff to do.
> 
> Or is this all you have?


Is what all I have?


----------



## Nice one (May 26, 2015)

interesting: London IWW brought an emergency motion at this year's IWW annual conference (which was passed) to stand in solidarity with Bahar Mustafa.

A while back i brought up the issue with London iww of another BME woman being bullied by a group of white middle class males it was met with muted indifference. Let's hope they maintain the principled position of supporting bullied women of colour, especially within radial political movements.

https://iww.org.uk/node/951


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

> a Goldsmiths students' union officer who has faced persecution in the mainstream media and death threats from the right wing for organising a meeting for BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) women and *non-binary people*.



Good grief.


----------



## likesfish (May 26, 2015)

So as long as your not white you can be an offensive idiot.

#killallblackwomen racist
#killallwhitemen harmless banter


----------



## The39thStep (May 26, 2015)

Nice one said:


> interesting: London IWW brought an emergency motion at this year's IWW annual conference (which was passed) to stand in solidarity with Bahar Mustafa.
> 
> A while back i brought up the issue with London iww of another BME woman being bullied by a group of white middle class males it was met with muted indifference. Let's hope they maintain the principled position of supporting bullied women of colour, especially within radial political movements.
> 
> https://iww.org.uk/node/951



Big Bill Haywood must be turning in his grave.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 26, 2015)

she's a racist! sack her off and forget about it!


----------



## BigMoaner (May 26, 2015)

heres from the same page linked a few posts back:

Bahar has done nothing wrong, and everything right. Every screech coming from her detractors strengthens the case that white people must be excluded from BME safe spaces, and men must be excluded from women’s spaces, and that cis white men should* basically be excluded from life generally*. As a little experiment, tweet the hashtag #supportbaharmustafa, offering your support, and see how many white men reply to you with their absolutely ignorant opinions about what racism is, and their demands to be educated, and the boring and wrong shit about Bahar’s ethnicity, and their #GamerGate hashtagged profiles.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 26, 2015)

so as a white working class male who is CIS (i think) i'll just let all of her non-binary crew and BME fight on without me as i am clearly not wanted in the march toward revolution.

it splits people up this shit.


----------



## BigMoaner (May 26, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> she's a racist! sack her off and forget about it!


follows own advice and leaves thread...


----------



## Red Cat (May 26, 2015)

There is no discussion on the thread. Its turned into an in-joke that loads of us don't get. 

And it wasn't not calm in the first place, it was a discussion. Its being made out that there was some kind of attack going on. Where was that?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> There is no discussion on the thread. Its turned into an in-joke that loads of us don't get.
> 
> And it wasn't not calm in the first place, it was a discussion. Its being made out that there was some kind of attack going on. Where was that?


the attack that never was


----------



## cantsin (May 26, 2015)

likesfish said:


> So as long as your not white you can be an offensive idiot.
> 
> #killallblackwomen racist
> #killallwhitemen harmless banter



try not to be a dick


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Good grief.


I think non-binary is quite good shorthand for people that don't readily identify as male or female, it's a long list otherwise.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> There is no discussion on the thread. Its turned into an in-joke that loads of us don't get.
> 
> And it wasn't not calm in the first place, it was a discussion. Its being made out that there was some kind of attack going on. Where was that?


When someone tells the thread that their dysphoria is kicking in, and that it's previously resulted in depression and suicidal ideation - then is a good time to stop deconstructing their identity imo.


----------



## Blagsta (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> When someone tells the thread that their dysphoria is kicking in, and that it's previously resulted in depression and suicidal ideation - then is a good time to stop deconstructing their identity imo.



I don't think anyone was deconstructing anyone's personal identity. It was an abstract discussion, it wasn't aimed at anyone specific. If someone finds the discussion upsetting, then yes, we need to be aware of that, but they also have a responsibility for their own health, not to get involved in discussions they may find upsetting.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I don't think anyone was deconstructing anyone's personal identity. It was an abstract discussion, it wasn't aimed at anyone specific. If someone finds the discussion upsetting, then yes, we need to be aware of that, but they also have a responsibility for their own health, not to get involved in discussions they may find upsetting.


It wasn't an abstract discussion for the people whose identities were being discussed. Don't you think we have the greater responsibility - AuntiStella was already on the thread having a general discussion before all this "born woman" challenge was aimed at her.


----------



## Blagsta (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It wasn't an abstract discussion for the people whose identities were being discussed. Don't you think we have the greater responsibility - AuntiStella was already on the thread having a general discussion before all this "born woman" challenge was aimed at her.



I didn't see anything aimed at her? Where was that?


----------



## likesfish (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I think non-binary is quite good shorthand for people that don't readily identify as male or female, it's a long list otherwise.



Check your privalige


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I didn't see anything aimed at her? Where was that?


Thora's initial challenge about "born women" started the trans-exclusionary discussion off.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Check your privalige


privilege


----------



## Blagsta (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Thora's initial challenge about "born women" started the trans-exclusionary discussion off.



Yes? I didn't read that as personally aimed at anyone. It's a political discussion. Are certain discussions now off limits?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Check your privalige


I am. I'm fucking fortunate.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Yes? I didn't read that as personally aimed at anyone. It's a political discussion. Are certain discussions now off limits?


It was personally aimed at the trans woman already on the thread. It wasn't abstract, it was about her.


----------



## Blagsta (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It was personally aimed at the trans woman already on the thread. It wasn't abstract, it was about her.



I disagree. It was a political discussion. If someone offers up their experiences as the person concerned did, then that's going to be up for discussion. As I said, if they know they're likely to get upset about it, don't offer it up for discussion.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I disagree. It was a political discussion. If someone offers up their experiences as the person concerned did, then that's going to be up for discussion. As I said, if they know they're likely to get upset about it, don't offer it up for discussion.


"self-censorship"


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I disagree. It was a political discussion. If someone offers up their experiences as the person concerned did, then that's going to be up for discussion. As I said, if they know they're likely to get upset about it, don't offer it up for discussion.



Offering up your experiences is a very different thing to being challenged on "born women" spaces. You think she was asking for it Blagsta?


----------



## Blagsta (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Offering up your experiences is a very different thing to being challenged on "born women" spaces. You think she was asking for it Blagsta?



Leave off with the "asking for it" insinuation.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Leave off with the "asking for it" insinuation.


No. It's not an insinuation, it was a question.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Leave off with the "asking for it" insinuation.


it's not an insinuation if it's explicit


----------



## Blagsta (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> "self-censorship"



There's another person on this thread who feels their experiences have been shut down by the person concerned making it all about themselves. I'll leave it up to them if they want to post about it. 

I'm out of here. 

The shutting down of debate on here is really shitty.


----------



## newbie (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> When someone tells the thread that their dysphoria is kicking in, and that it's previously resulted in depression and suicidal ideation - then is a good time to stop deconstructing their identity imo.


this is really quite difficult, isn't it?

AS posted that her gender identity is not "at all political", and I disagreed with her.   In doing so I am, to some extent, deconstructing what it means to be her, and that may cause her unhappiness or depression.  I certainly hope not, I wish her personally nothing but happiness, and I hope that doesn't sound patronising, I've no idea how to write something that won't be misconstrued. 

But hers can only be the last words in the discussion if she is right in her assertion, and I don't think she is.  I have no idea how to square that circle without causing some form of potential upset.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

newbie said:


> this is really quite difficult, isn't it?
> 
> AS posted that her gender identity is not "at all political", and I disagreed with her.   In doing so I am, to some extent, deconstructing what it means to be her, and that may cause her unhappiness or depression.  I certainly hope not, I wish her personally nothing but happiness, and I hope that doesn't sound patronising, I've no idea how to write something that won't be misconstrued.
> 
> But hers can only be the last words in the discussion if she is right in her assertion, and I don't think she is.  I have no idea how to square that circle without causing some form of potential upset.


everyone's identity is political and as no exception


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

...imo of course


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

newbie said:


> this is really quite difficult, isn't it?
> 
> AS posted that her gender identity is not "at all political", and I disagreed with her.   In doing so I am, to some extent, deconstructing what it means to be her, and that may cause her unhappiness or depression.  I certainly hope not, I wish her personally nothing but happiness, and I hope that doesn't sound patronising, I've no idea how to write something that won't be misconstrued.
> 
> But hers can only be the last words in the discussion if she is right in her assertion, and I don't think she is.  I have no idea how to square that circle without causing some form of potential upset.


She's had days of people doing it though. You'd need to ask her of course but is it really that necessary to have your questions answered right now?


----------



## newbie (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> everyone's identity is political and as no exception


but stating that in this context may promote a feeling of depression in one or more specific people, and I don't suppose that's your intention any more than it is mine.  That's why cesare is right, but so are you and I.


----------



## newbie (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> She's had days of people doing it though. You'd need to ask her of course but is it really that necessary to have your questions answered right now?


someone posts, someone else replies, that's the way these things work.  Leaving it for a day, a week, a month and then resurrecting it would seem almost vindictive.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

newbie said:


> someone posts, someone else replies, that's the way these things work.  Leaving it for a day, a week, a month and then resurrecting it would seem almost vindictive.


As stethoscope said, she's stopped justifying herself now, people either respect her or not and she doesn't spend time justifying her existence. But AS is relatively new to this and there's a good chance that it's hard for her to disentangle herself from the constant questioning without stopping posting.


----------



## newbie (May 26, 2015)

disrespect and disagreement are not the same thing. 

The issue right at the heart of all this is how political is the personal, and that cannot be discussed without, at least to some extent, deconstructing the identity of the people most closely concerned.  Other peoples opinions, respectfully put, may cause them pain. 

I've no real clue how to proceed- I suppose the only properly respectful way is just stfu, but that leaves the discussion fractured and tends to amplify those who are neither respectful nor polite.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

It could all be solved if everyone started discussing the thread topic as per the op?


----------



## newbie (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It could all be solved if everyone started discussing the thread topic as per the op?


because where the thread has arrived at is off limits because it's not political it's personal?


----------



## co-op (May 26, 2015)

newbie said:


> this is really quite difficult, isn't it?
> 
> AS posted that her gender identity is not "at all political", and I disagreed with her.   In doing so I am, to some extent, deconstructing what it means to be her, and that may cause her unhappiness or depression.



stethoscope also completely dismissed AS's point without any explanation

It's not that I think AS was right about this point, just why's it ok for some people to make this kind of challenge to her pov, not for others?


eta - in terms of the particular issue of AS and her emotional state right now, as far as I can tell she has me on ignore but if anyone wants to quote me she'll see my posts so think about that if you are going to.


----------



## 8ball (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I think non-binary is quite good shorthand for people that don't readily identify as male or female, it's a long list otherwise.


 
There are 10 kinds of people in the world...


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

newbie said:


> because where the thread has arrived at is off limits because it's not political it's personal?



If the topic becomes about a subject that relates to individual posters it could be deemed as personal. But I'm just saying it isn't the topic in the op.


----------



## newbie (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> If the topic becomes about a subject that relates to individual posters it could be deemed as personal. But I'm just saying it isn't the topic in the op.


the latter bit is utterly irrelevant tmm, but the former, yeah, so I'll stfu and see what happens.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 26, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> so as a white working class male who is CIS (i think) i'll just let all of her non-binary crew and BME fight on without me as i am clearly not wanted in the march toward revolution.
> 
> it splits people up this shit.



As cesare and others have noted in this thread, we've already seen identity politics tear the broad left apart once. The fact that people haven't learned from 30 years ago pretty much confirms the old saw that "those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it".


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Firstly I’m not suffering from dysphoria in the least. And yes it is a risk but I really have no intention of shutting the discussion down so I’d rather take a back seat than be in there arguing and trying to defend myself. I don’t feel any need to defend myself – I am very strong now and extremely well supported. Whenever I have doubts about my identity as a woman my partner (a very cis, straight man) just tells me to stop being stupid (in the nicest way. It’s a good base from which to embark on my new life.

I’ve had these arguments for about a year now. If I don’t out myself as trans however I am just treated as a woman; but if I do out myself as trans which I usually do, suddenly it’s a different story and I receive negative responses from some people, roughly equally male and female, though most cis women I meet don’t care that I’m trans and still treat me as another woman, men tend to be more awkward about it tbh, rather than out and out hostile.

Men and women who fit into the binary do not generally have their gender identity challenged. To have universal acceptance of your gender identity and to not even have to think about it is a cis privilege. By all mean discuss this stuff but do realise you are exercising your cis privilege over trans people and don’t be surprised when trans people are unwilling to remain in the discussion.

I am far from a typical trans woman though – being an essentially political person and one who never ever wanted to be a trans activist – I can’t help but wade in and try to make my point of view heard!

The way we express our gender identity is political. The way we interact is political, but our gender identity is not political any more than the number of legs we have or what colour our eyes are. It just is. The fact that for most of my life I was denied the right to express my true gender is political. The fact that now that I am expressing my true gender is not political. It just is.

My gender identity impacts on no-one else’s gender identity unless their gender identity is being used to control others. My gender identity does unfortunately challenge doctrines that refuse or are unable to take my gender identity into consideration. This is not my failing, this is a failing of the doctrine and those who perpetuate it.

I’ve been trying to engage with trans exclusionists since last autumn with the aim of us understanding each others position but too often the TE I’m talking to insists that I first accept that I am a man before we can continue. I cannot accept what I know to be a lie at the very start of a political dialogue.

A gender critical feminist I made contact with last year on Twitter – who I began to consider as a friend – received so much abuse from trans exclusionists just because she was talking to me that she had to block me. Now we remain in contact via email. And yes we do have fundamental contradictions in our viewpoints but we co-exist and we still accept each other as women.

I was not prepared for the out and out hostility I would receive from some other women tbh and it knocked me back a lot. But I still have a mission of mutual understanding if at all possible, I will get there. But I am not going away and I will always be a woman.



Thanks to those who have sent me messages of support, it is deeply, deeply appreciated.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

newbie said:


> disrespect and disagreement are not the same thing.
> 
> The issue right at the heart of all this is how political is the personal, and that cannot be discussed without, at least to some extent, deconstructing the identity of the people most closely concerned.  Other peoples opinions, respectfully put, may cause them pain.
> 
> I've no real clue how to proceed- I suppose the only properly respectful way is just stfu, but that leaves the discussion fractured and tends to amplify those who are neither respectful nor polite.


or everyone could just accept that trans people know what gender they are the same as everyone else does. That seems to work.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> There's another person on this thread who feels their experiences have been shut down by the person concerned making it all about themselves. I'll leave it up to them if they want to post about it.
> 
> I'm out of here.
> 
> The shutting down of debate on here is really shitty.



Is this a coded claim that I tried to shut the debate down? How? I merely removed myself from it. I have that right! Everyone has that right!

There was unfortunately one person on this thread who was trying to make it personal and I chose to ignore those posts rather than rise to it.

I'm hardly trying to make it all about myself, but let's face it, I seem to be the only trans person on this thread so me talking about my own experiences is surely pretty valid, or not?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Is this a coded claim that I tried to shut the debate down? How? I merely removed myself from it. I have that right! Everyone has that right!
> 
> There was unfortunately one person on this thread who was trying to make it personal and I chose to ignore those posts rather than rise to it.


I think he meant that I was trying to shut debate down, I think it was directed at me rather than you.

Edit: and just to add to that - my response to his accusation is that free speech is fine, but then so is the freedom of response.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I think he meant that I was trying to shut debate down, I think it was directed at me rather than you.



OK - but again, I don't see how that is true.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> OK - but again, I don't see how that is true.


I don't think it was true either. I think he didn't like my equal and opposite response to his exercising of free speech.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I don't think it was true either. I think he didn't like my equal and opposite response to his exercising of free speech.



That fits with the cries of "no platforming" every time a trans woman tried to express an opinion in public.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

AS, has a single, solitary person on this thread said that you are a man?  If not, why do you keep returning to this frame of reference?

As far as I can tell, the argument has more been about whether or not "being a man" or "being a woman" are actually well defined terms in the first place.  And, if so, who gets to make those definitions, and do they help?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> That fits with the cries of "no platforming" every time a trans woman tried to express an opinion in public.


People trying to prevent trans women from having a platform?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> People trying to prevent trans women from having a platform?


No - claims by trans excluding feminists (many of whom have privileged access to the media) that the mere act of us responding to their claims is "no platforming"


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> No - claims by trans excluding feminists (many of whom have privileged access to the media) that the mere act of us responding to their claims is "no platforming"


Ah, OK, I see, cheers.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> I disagree. It was a political discussion. If someone offers up their experiences as the person concerned did, then that's going to be up for discussion. As I said, if they know they're likely to get upset about it, don't offer it up for discussion.



I think the key word here is "discussion". Discussion is fine, but being told your whole gender identity is fallacious is not a discussion.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> AS, has a single, solitary person on this thread said that you are a man?  If not, why do you keep returning to this frame of reference?
> 
> As far as I can tell, the argument has more been about whether or not "being a man" or "being a woman" are actually well defined terms in the first place.  And, if so, who gets to make those definitions, and do they help?



Because its an extremely common accusation I receive from those who want to exclude me from women's spaces. The argument to exclude trans women from women's spaces inevitably lead to the claim that trans women are in fact men.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Because its an extremely common accusation I receive from those who want to exclude me from women's spaces. The argument to exclude trans women from women's spaces inevitably lead to the claim that trans women are in fact men.


And this is because they wouldn't seek to exclude trans women from their spaces unless they actually did think trans women are in fact men. If they think that trans women are women, they wouldn't want to try and exclude them, presumably.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Because its an extremely common accusation I receive from those who want to exclude me from women's spaces. The argument to exclude trans women from women's spaces inevitably lead to the claim that trans women are in fact men.


It means, though, you aren't engaging with what people *in this thread* are saying or thinking at all.  You are assuming them to be saying and thinking the crap you've heard in the past and re-engaging with that all over again instead, to the detriment of us all, yourself included.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> And this is because they wouldn't seek to exclude trans women from their spaces unless they actually did think trans women are in fact men. If they think that trans women are women, they wouldn't want to try and exclude them, presumably.


That's just a plain old fallacious line of logic.

It also only relates to a fraction of what has been said on this thread.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> It means, though, you aren't engaging with what people *in this thread* are saying or thinking at all.  You are assuming them to be saying and thinking the crap you've heard in the past and re-engaging with that all over again instead, to the detriment of us all, yourself included.


The fact that you don't recognise trans exclusionary arguments, however coded, doesn't mean to say that they're not there.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> That's just a plain old fallacious line of logic.



You'll need to set out why.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> It also only relates to a fraction of what has been said on this thread.



It may have been a fraction as far as you're concerned, but it's pretty fundamental when you're the recipient.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> It means, though, you aren't engaging with what people *in this thread* are saying or thinking at all.  You are assuming them to be saying and thinking the crap you've heard in the past and re-engaging with that all over again instead, to the detriment of us all, yourself included.


That's nonsense. I've been engaging as much as I can. I could just choose not to engage at all.

And as I said, I'm not even attempting to defend my gender identity - but explaining it and the consequences of it, and where critics of trans people are coming from. 

And there have been trans exclusionist arguments on this thread so you are incorrect.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> That's just a plain old fallacious line of logic.


Explain why



kabbes said:


> It also only relates to a fraction of what has been said on this thread.


I never said it didn't but its still there and I still have to deal with it.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> You'll need to set out why.



^^^This please...I asked for these 'details' and/or peoples experiences earlier in the thread. I feel like I need them to understand why some people don't think it's right to include trans* women in women only spaces.

What are people imagining would happen? What does happen?


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> You'll need to set out why.


You're the one claiming a syllogism -- you set out why that syllogism is true.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> ^^^This please...I asked for these 'details' and/or peoples experiences earlier in the thread. I feel like I need them to understand why some people don't think it's right to include trans* women in women only spaces.
> 
> What are people imagining would happen? What does happen?


I've asked over and over for evidence that trans women are a threat to cis women, above that from other cis women, and have seen none. I was actually raped by a cis woman so I know abuse can go the other way!

The cis women I know trust me implicitly in the way they would never trust a man. It initially suprised me that I am so trusted as I assumed nothing at the start of this process. It seems to me that my cis female friends accepted me as female long before I accepted myself as female.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Has anyone made that argument? Thora started to explore what gender actually means. I thought she made interesting points although I'm guessing it was that which sailed too close to the wind? Red Cat too.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> You're the one claiming a syllogism -- you set out why that syllogism is true.



You're the one using academic language. If you're not prepared to explain what you mean it's a pretty poor show.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

I'm out of here! Please discuss me as you please.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Has anyone made that argument? Thora started to explore what gender actually means. I thought she made interesting points although I'm guessing it was that which sailed too close to the wind? Red Cat too.


That's how I saw it too


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> You're the one using academic language. If you're not prepared to explain what you mean it's a pretty poor show.


You said the only reason for A can be B.  You need to do a lot of work to show B is the only possible reason for A.


----------



## emanymton (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> You'll need to set out why.


I would say that for one thing saying someone is not a women is not the same thing as saying they are a man. And secondly it may be possible to agree someone is a woman and still feel they should be excluded from women only spaces. Not saying I necessarily agree but it's what stood out to me.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

emanymton said:


> I would say that for one thing saying someone is not a women is not the same thing as saying they are a man. And secondly it may be possible to agree someone is a woman and still feel they should be excluded from women only spaces. Not saying I necessarily agree but it's what stood out to me.


So we go full circle


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> You said the only reason for A can be B.  You need to do a lot of work to show B is the only possible reason for A.


Well if it's not their argument, and fallacious as you say, then the people arguing it need to provide the evidence for exclusion.


----------



## seventh bullet (May 26, 2015)

The39thStep said:


> Big Bill Haywood must be turning in his grave.



Just a middle class tribute band.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 26, 2015)

Nice one said:


> interesting: London IWW brought an *emergency motion*...



Since when is a twitter storm a fucking emergency?


----------



## co-op (May 26, 2015)

emanymton said:


> I would say that for one thing saying someone is not a women is not the same thing as saying they are a man. .



For some people it is the same (not me). I think AS has come very close to saying it, although maybe I am mis-reading her?



AuntiStella said:


> Men and women who fit into the binary do not generally have their gender identity challenged.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

I've spent the last two hours reading various arguments online. It's complicated. I have sympathy with both sides tbh.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Since when is a twitter storm a fucking emergency?


It's not just a twitter storm now though. The person/people who have engineered this have co-opted the right wing press, 4chan, reddit, etc in an effort to blow it up out of all proportion, lose her job, have her investigated by the police and strip her of her degree. Whatever I think of her politics, the more I hear about what's happened and read it for myself, the stronger my support for her. The politics can wait.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> The fact that you don't recognise trans exclusionary arguments, however coded, doesn't mean to say that they're not there.



Framing it as 'trans-exclusionary' - and therefore bigoted - is surely problematic?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Framing it as 'trans-exclusionary' - and therefore bigoted - is surely problematic?


It's excluding trans people so it sounds descriptive to me. If the reason for exclusion is bigotry, then they're not really in a strong position to be upset by people calling them bigots. If it's not bigotry, then they need to provide credible evidence to support their trans exclusion.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> It means, though, you aren't engaging with what people *in this thread* are saying or thinking at all.  You are assuming them to be saying and thinking the crap you've heard in the past and re-engaging with that all over again instead, to the detriment of us all, yourself included.


engaging? you don't have a leg to stand on.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I've spent the last two hours reading various arguments online. It's complicated. I have sympathy with both sides tbh.


i hope that fence is comfy


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's excluding trans people so it sounds descriptive to me. If the reason for exclusion is bigotry, then they're not really in a strong position to be upset by people calling them bigots. If it's not bigotry, then they need to provide credible evidence to support their trans exclusion.



I'm playing devils advocate here based on some views I've read. One problem is the concept of someone merely having to 'identify' as a woman' to be allowed into female only spaces of which there's a whole spectrum. So for all intents and purposes a man can rock up to a female only space, say he identifies as a woman and expect to be let in? If not, where is a line drawn on the trans spectrum?

The other argument was based on female oppression being based largely on their reproductive systems. Things that are unique to cis women.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i hope that fence is comfy



Things in life are nuanced.


----------



## likesfish (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's not just a twitter storm now though. The person/people who have engineered this have co-opted the right wing press, 4chan, reddit, etc in an effort to blow it up out of all proportion, lose her job, have her investigated by the police and strip her of her degree. Whatever I think of her politics, the more I hear about what's happened and read it for myself, the stronger my support for her. The politics can wait.




Sorry she behaved idiotically then decided to double down on her idiocy then complains she's being bullied.
 What the fuck did she expect?
 The male tears cartoon was a call out turns put she can hand it out just cant take it.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Framing it as 'trans-exclusionary' - and therefore bigoted - is surely problematic?


only if framing a spade as a digging implement is problematic


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm playing devils advocate here based on some views I've read. One problem is the concept of someone merely having to 'identify' as a woman' to be allowed into female only spaces of which there's a whole spectrum. So for all intents and purposes a man can rock up to a female only space, say he identifies as a woman and expect to be let in? If not, where is a line drawn on the trans spectrum?
> 
> The other argument was based on female oppression being based largely on their reproductive systems. Things that are unique to cis women.



Before we go any further with this "devil's advocate" position, can you just explain what you mean by merely identifying?  And then also the reproductive system aspect - what's the significance with that?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Sorry she behaved idiotically then decided to double down on her idiocy then complains she's being bullied.
> What the fuck did she expect?
> The male tears cartoon was a call out turns put she can hand it out just cant take it.


You've said some really really really fucking stupid stuff on here eg about Muslims. Anyone hunted you down for it, tried to lose you your job, investigated by the police etc?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> The other argument was based on female oppression being based largely on their reproductive systems. Things that are unique to cis women.



Its an opinion some women hold. It's not by any means a majority view within feminism, and it is not a verifiable truth. Why should their dogma win over against my personal experience and identity.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Before we go any further with this "devil's advocate" position, can you just explain what you mean by merely identifying?  And then also the reproductive system aspect - what's the significance with that?



So you haven't even bothered to acquaint yourself with these positions prior to dismissing them as exclusionist?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So you haven't even bothered to acquaint yourself with these positions prior to dismissing them as exclusionist?


but they are exclusionist.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So you haven't even bothered to acquaint yourself with these positions prior to dismissing them as exclusionist?


I have. A lot longer than your couple of hours just now.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Its an opinion some women hold. It's not by any means a majority view within feminism, and it is not a verifiable truth. Why should their dogma win over against my personal experience and identity.



But why does one opinion have to conquer all?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> But why does one opinion have to conquer all?


my question exactly!!

Why not ask the exclusionists?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I have. A lot longer than your couple of hours just now.



And what about others including Thora who now appear to be silent in the debate as the bigot hammer cracks down?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> And what about others including Thora who now appear to be silent in the debate as the bigot hammer cracks down?


There's a bigot hammer falling on Casually Red in the Irish equal marriage thread too


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> There's a bigot hammer falling on Casually Red in the Irish equal marriage thread too



So cis women have to accept everyone who identifies as female into women only spaces or they're bigots?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> And what about others including Thora who now appear to be silent in the debate as the bigot hammer cracks down?


I was called a bigot (misogynist) many, many times including in a widely distributed blog and given no right to reply. And all I wanted to do was argue from my personal gender identity and not on the assumption of some others that I was a man.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So cis women have to accept everyone who identifies as female into women only spaces or they're bigots?


trans women don't accept everyone that claims to be trans so I doubt it. We are able to police ourselves quite well.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I was called a bigot (misogynist) many, many times including in a widely distributed blog and given no right to reply. And all I wanted to do was argue from my personal gender identity and not on the assumption of some others that I was a man.



I don't think anyone on here thinks you're a man. I don't.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So cis women have to accept everyone who identifies as female into women only spaces or they're bigots?


Most Cis women already do. There are some Cis women that don't and yes, they might be bigots.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> trans women don't accept everyone that claims to be trans so I doubt it. We are able to police ourselves quite well.



So where is the line drawn?


----------



## 8ball (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> There's a bigot hammer falling on Casually Red in the Irish equal marriage thread too


 
Although some people were a bit meh about equal marriage on the reasonable suspicion that it was a ploy by the heterosexual community to make everyone else as miserable as they are.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So cis women have to accept everyone who identifies as female into women only spaces or they're bigots?


most cis women are perfectly happy to admit trans women into womens spaces - so please make that clear - it is a minority who try to exclude us.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

8ball said:


> Although some people were a bit meh about equal marriage on the reasonable suspicion that it was a ploy by the heterosexual community to make everyone else as miserable as they are.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So where is the line drawn?


that's our business, not yours


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> most cis women are perfectly happy to admit trans women into womens spaces - so please make that clear - it is a minority who try to exclude us.



But what about their views? I'm not certain that they're driven by bigotry tbh. They *may* be.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I don't think anyone on here thinks you're a man. I don't.


I've been called a man so many times by TEs that I know the arguments by now and where they lead.

If I'm not a man, what am I?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> that's our business, not yours



"our"?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> "our"?


Women's


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I've been called a man so many times by TEs that I know the arguments by now and where they lead.
> 
> If I'm not a man, what am I?



Not a woman. Or are you disagreeing now with my suggestion earlier as being "too binary"?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> But what about their views? I'm not certain that they're driven by bigotry tbh. They *may* be.


They are perfectly entitled to hold their views but they have no right impose them on the majority of women.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Not a woman. Or are youm disagreeing now with my suggestion earlier as being "too binary"?


I am binary though - I've met non binary people and I am not like any of them. I am a woman.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I am binary though - I've met non binary people and I am not like any of them. I am a woman.





But when I suggested this you disagreed with me. Were you being sardonic?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Everytime someone suggests I'm not a woman I put them on ignore. sorry about that but it actually hurts me.


----------



## cantsin (May 26, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Sorry she behaved idiotically then decided to double down on her idiocy then complains she's being bullied.
> What the fuck did she expect?
> The male tears cartoon was a call out turns put she can hand it out just cant take it.



gamers/mens right sadfucks/Daily Mail/Toby Youngites/anti PC weirdos, UKIPers, raco dickwads of every hue etc etc all weighing in against one person here ....and little keyboard melt here reckons she 'just can't take it' .

Laughable.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Not a woman. Or are you disagreeing now with my suggestion earlier as being "too binary"?


Jesus fucking wept.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

"I'm just being devil's advocate. You're not a woman"


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Jesus fucking wept.



Wow. When I stated earlier (during a disagreement with Jousmaster) that I view people as men or women I was dismissed as being 'too binary' (a post liked by you iirc). But when altering my position to reflect that new information I'm wrong again?


----------



## DotCommunist (May 26, 2015)

cantsin said:


> gamers/mens right sadfucks/Daily Mail/Toby Youngites/anti PC weirdos, UKIPers, raco dickwads of every hue etc etc all weighing in against one person here ....and little keyboard melt here reckons she 'just can't take it' .
> 
> Laughable.




a legion of spiteful neckbearded internet sociopaths lurk on that 4chan. Peeds  as well.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

I've already said a couple of posts above that I consider her female. I got my hand slapped for being too binary as she's a transwoman. not a ciswoman. Then she says she is binary. My head is spinninmg.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I've already said a couple of posts above that I consider her female. I got my hand slapped for being too binary as she's a transwoman. not a ciswoman. Then she says she is binary. My head is spinninmg.


That's what happens when you try and be devil's advocate and also white knight without being clear about the arguments.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> That's what happens when you try and be devil's advocate and also white knight without being clear about the arguments.



We'd be more clear about the arguments if the debate wasn't closed down by labelling one side of it bigoted. You're partly to blame for this.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> We'd be more clear about the arguments if the debate wasn't closed down by labelling one side of it bigoted. You're partly to blame for this.


It's my fault that you've now decided that "trans exclusionary" is derogatory and you don't like trans exclusionary people being upset?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

The crux of this whether we have the right to self identify as what we know to be our true gender and to express that gender in the way that everybody else does. Or not - its our choice. 

To self identify is a right for everybody except trans people apparently as cis people know better. 

Bigotry is when you discriminate against a group of people based on some dogma that you are unable or unwilling to discuss. 

the feminist trans exclusionary argument is bigotry.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 26, 2015)

I think things in the last few posts got confused because it swung from the general to the specific. ETA - Citizen66


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

It's partially your fault that I'm as ignorant as I am on the matter - which you appear keen to remind me - by stiffling any opposing argument as bigoted, yes. IMO obvs.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Fozzie Bear said:


> I think things in the last few posts got confused because it swung from the general to the specific. ETA - Citizen66



But it keeps being pulled to the specific!


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> But it keeps being pulled to the specific!



Well that's because it is something that people who have directly experienced that oppression feel very strongly about. It's not "devil's advocate" for them - it's their life.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> That's what happens when you try and be devil's advocate and also white knight without being clear about the arguments.



I'm only playing devils advocate because everyone else appears to have been frightened off the thread. I agree I'm the wrong person to be doing it. I want educating though. By both sides of the debate.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Well that's because it is something that people who have directly experienced that oppression feel very strongly about. It's not "devil's advocate" for them - it's their life.



True. But then how do we learn?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

I'm starting to think this discussion would go a whole lot better if an actual trans woman wasn't here.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> True. But then how do we learn?



Well I'm sure you have taught yourself about all kinds of stuff in the past? Did you have to debate with a specific black person to learn about racism?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Well I'm sure you have taught yourself about all kinds of stuff in the past? Did you have to debate with a specific black person to learn about racism?



Is discussing racism off bounds here?


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I'm starting to think this discussion would go a whole lot better if an actual trans woman wasn't here.



I'm sorry you feel that. I am very pleased you are here.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Is discussing racism off bounds here?



No. And neither is this discussion which we are actually having. I'll admit it is quite awkward and painful, but perhaps that is only to be expected given the relatively short time (compared to racism) that this stuff has been articulated.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Fozzie Bear said:


> No. And neither is this discussion which we are actually having. I'll admit it is quite awkward and painful, but perhaps that is only to be expected given the relatively short time (compared to racism) that this stuff has been articulated.



I only want to further my understanding. When I said earlier in the thread that I accept what gender people tell me they identify with I was told I'm being too binary. I'm more confused than when we started this discussion tbh.


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> heres from the same page linked a few posts back:
> 
> Bahar has done nothing wrong, and everything right. Every screech coming from her detractors strengthens the case that white people must be excluded from BME safe spaces, and men must be excluded from women’s spaces, and that cis white men should* basically be excluded from life generally*.



worth pointing out this was linked to, but not actually posted on the IWW site







one at a time eh stavvers?

I don't want to get angry about this, I know that as she points out in the comments these are just "rhetoric, bombastic statements" commenting on "the directionality of structural violence" but fuck, in the context of where I'm from, and the people I've known and what's taking place now this stuff is just toxic.  Lots of people whose lives are being demolished are coming into contact with the left for the first time, lots of them are cis white men, and this is what they might find?  fuck this, not everyone lives in a fucking london liberal bubble, try coming out with this crap in a homeless shelter or on a northern housing estate and see how far you get.  if your idea of politics is comments that would get you laughed at or lynched in most working class spaces then you need to have a big fucking think.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I only want to further my understanding. When I said earlier in the thread that I accept what gender people tell me they identify with I was told I'm being too binary. I'm more confused than when we started this discussion tbh.



Which post was that?

This one: http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...ficer-facing-sack.335058/page-8#post-13904851 ?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

This is why I can't stand this shit. Goldsmiths ffs. Telling wwc people fucked when the shipyards and steelworks closed that they're privileged.


----------



## the button (May 26, 2015)




----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Which post was that?
> 
> This one: http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...ficer-facing-sack.335058/page-8#post-13904851 ?



#1047


----------



## likesfish (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> You've said some really really really fucking stupid stuff on here eg about Muslims. Anyone hunted you down for it, tried to lose you your job, investigated by the police etc?



I don't get paid to promote equaility and diversity


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

the button said:


>


I still have 9 to get


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> #1047



My reading of that is that you were suggesting people identified as male or female. Some people don't identify as either. So a strict definition of gender as binary "male OR female" is wrong.

However the emphasis has to be on how actual individuals identify. In 99.9% of cases it is not up to me to disagree with someone's own gender identity.

There are various "devils advocate" and whataboutery positions we can discuss in a minute. But first off, does that make sense to you?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

likesfish said:


> I don't get paid to promote equaility and diversity


or spelling or good sense


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I still have 9 to get


still? for shame!


----------



## cantsin (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> worth pointing out this was linked to, but not actually posted on the IWW site
> 
> 
> 
> ...



but the woman in question here works @ frickin goldmsiths, as a bloody diversity officer, no one's pretending she works on a housing estate or homeless shelter,  or that her politics would be particularly relevant ( or helpful possibly) in those enviroments ? 

You could take 95% of topics ever discussed on these boards and say the same, it doesn't mean you'd wish the rightwing fucktard brigade on an individual member who got singled out by the scum press ?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Wow. When I stated earlier (during a disagreement with Jousmaster) that I view people as men or women I was dismissed as being 'too binary' (a post liked by you iirc). But when altering my position to reflect that new information I'm wrong again?


i like posts for lots of reasons, and the likes should not be taken as agreement in every case. why you should think as agrees with every post she likes seems to me peculiar.


----------



## likesfish (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> or spelling or good sense


True That

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/68693038/university-officer-may-be-sacked-after-racist-tweet.

The tweet was a fair one have your little bme women echo chamber fair one.
  The sarcy y tone towards " allies" wasnt really helpful the stupid male tears photo was inviting trouble  what the fuck did she expect was going to happen?


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

cantsin said:


> but the woman in question here works @ frickin goldmsiths, as a bloody diversity officer, no one's pretending she works on a housing estate or homeless shelter,  or that her politics would be particularly relevant ( or helpful possibly) in those enviroments ?
> 
> You could take 95% of topics ever discussed on these boards and say the same, it doesn't mean you'd wish the rightwing fucktard brigade on an individual member who got singled out by the scum press ?



I'm not talking about the comment made by Bahar Mustafa, I'm talking about what Stavvers said (in the post that was quoted) on a reasonably successful political blog that has often talked about welfare reforms etc


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

likesfish said:


> have your little bme women echo chamber fair one.





What annoys you about BME Women's meetings exactly? likesfish


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

likesfish said:


> True That
> 
> http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/68693038/university-officer-may-be-sacked-after-racist-tweet.
> 
> ...


I also think the response was fairly predictable, but I'm not about to support such comments as "I want to rape your cunt with a chainsaw, bitch"


----------



## cantsin (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> I'm not talking about the comment made by Bahar Mustafa, I'm talking about what Stavvers said (in the post that was quoted) on a reasonably successful political blog that has often talked about welfare reforms etc



ah...apols, I'll stfu then


----------



## likesfish (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I also think the response was fairly predictable, but I'm not about to support such comments as "I want to rape your cunt with a chainsaw, bitch"



No I wouldnt support that or similar 
  She deserves to be called on her idiocy not threatened


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

and you know what, if she'd said rich, or even middle class white men then I wouldn't have given a shit, and you would get away with saying that in most working class spaces


----------



## rekil (May 26, 2015)

> Bahar’s detractors are fixated on her ethnicity as a Turkish Cypriot, and keep churning out burbled nonsense about how this makes her the oppressor in Cyprus (and personally responsible for the Armenian genocide). As a Greek Cypriot, let me just say this is one of the most absurd things I’ve ever heard, and they are mixing up Turkish Cypriots–a Turkish speaking ethnic group who’ve lived on the island for centuries, and the state of Turkey (which perpetrated the Armenian genocide and invaded Cyprus).


Now we're getting somewhere. Or are we? Is Ottoman Empire Privilege a thing and does it merit a spoke on The Wheel Of Oppression?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Fozzie Bear said:


> My reading of that is that you were suggesting people identified as male or female. Some people don't identify as either. So a strict definition of gender as binary "male OR female" is wrong.
> 
> However the emphasis has to be on how actual individuals identify. In 99.9% of cases it is not up to me to disagree with someone's own gender identity.
> 
> There are various "devils advocate" and whataboutery positions we can discuss in a minute. But first off, does that make sense to you?



My point was I would refer to someone's gender as how they referred to their gender. Tbf it was a different stage of the debate where we were discussing cis etc. But when it cropped up again it confused me because it *appeared* to be contradicting the earlier point.


----------



## likesfish (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> What annoys you about BME Women's meetings exactly? likesfish



Nothing really though the male tears cartoon wasnt really professional if your a welfare and diversity officer you should at least attempt to appear  that your approachable by all members of the student body not just the trendy lefties
 (apart from its UK students politics so  its inherantly pointless )


----------



## likesfish (May 26, 2015)

copliker said:


> Now we're getting somewhere. Or are we? Is Ottoman Empire Privilege a thing and does it merit a spoke on The Wheel Of Oppression?



Tbf the turks invaded cyprus because the greek cypriots had decided " to remove kebab" as the internet meme goes


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> My point was I would refer to someone's gender as how they referred to their gender. Tbf it was a different stage of the debate where we were discussing cis etc. But when it cropped up again it confused me because it *appeared* to be contradicting the earlier point.



That's fair enough. Has this helped?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Nothing really though the male tears cartoon wasnt really professional if your a welfare and diversity officer you should at least attempt to appear  that your approachable by all members of the student body not just the trendy lefties
> (apart from its UK students politics so  its inherantly pointless )



I don't disagree with you actually. I think her cartoon was mocking and combative, it was a stupid thing to do in her position.

My question to you though was because of the way you referred to BME women's meetings as 'little' and as an 'echo chamber.' That was very dismissive of them as a thing rather than BM and her childish behaviour.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> There's a bigot hammer falling on Casually Red in the Irish equal marriage thread too



Now there's a surprise.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So cis women have to accept everyone who identifies as female into women only spaces or they're bigots?



It seems to me that most argument comes from fixed positions on this, whereas reality as it unfolds in *individual situations* maybe somewhat more fluid and "case-by-case". One wouldn't admit a male hairy-arsed greasy biker to a womens' refuge merely because he stated "I'm a woman", for example.

This is yet another problem with identity politics, IMO. It's too rigid. Intersectionalism *should* add nuance, but the way it is deployed mostly to add up the degree or lack of privilege means that we don't generate any meaningful schema by which you can map *why* or how privilege works, all you can do is make assumptions that "x is more privileged than y".


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i like posts for lots of reasons, and the likes should not be taken as agreement in every case. why you should think as agrees with every post she likes seems to me peculiar.



That's what it meant in this instance though.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Fozzie Bear said:


> That's fair enough. Has this helped?



I'd rather some voices were still part of the debate.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> That's what it meant in this instance though.


good.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I'd rather some voices were still part of the debate.


Do you support freedom of response?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> and you know what, if she'd said rich, or even middle class white men then I wouldn't have given a shit, and you would get away with saying that in most working class spaces



It's probably true in the Goldsmiths bubble. Clumsy to boil it all down to that with all the shit that's happening though.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Do you support freedom of response?



I do. I don't support labelling people bigots though without fully hearing their arguments first.


----------



## 8den (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> or everyone could just accept that trans people know what gender they are the same as everyone else does. That seems to work.


I want to do more than just like the above.

In two sentences AS succinctly summed up how I feel on this issue.

I imagine many Transgender people must endure a enormous amount of inner turmoil before they can stand up and ask to be accepted for who they are.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> But when I suggested this you disagreed with me. Were you being sardonic?


no I didn't!! Some people are non-binary. I am NOT non binary. 

I have a problem with you deciding what my gender is. Do you understand that?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I do. I don't support labelling people bigots though without fully hearing their arguments first.


How about if you _have_ fully heard their arguments?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> no I didn't!! Some people are non-binary. I am NOT non binary.
> 
> I have a problem with you deciding what my gender is. Do you understand that?



I said I'd accept people's gender as they identify themselves.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> How about if you _have_ fully heard their arguments?



Then I'd stop everyone else from understanding the issue because I already understand it?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Then I'd stop everyone else from understanding the issue because I already understand it?


No, I'd argue against them. And if they go off in a huff that's entirely a matter for them.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> No, I'd argue against them. And if they go off in a huff that's entirely a matter for them.



So you think everyone with an opposing view are driven by bigotry?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I said I'd accept people's gender as they identify themselves.


Why did you say I was non-binary?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So you think everyone with an opposing view are driven by bigotry?


Not at all. For example I think your views are driven by a wish for whataboutery rather than bigotry.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So you think everyone with an opposing view are driven by bigotry?


I would say just people who use their dogma to "prove" that some people need to be excluded, vilified and abused.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Why did you say I was non-binary?



Because I was left with the impression from our previous exchange that everyone is non binary. I apologise if I'm not grasping it. It's the first time I've discussed this properly so it's uncharted waters for me.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Not at all. For example I think your views are driven by a wish for whataboutery rather than bigotry.



I read some opposing views after the ones on here went quiet and wondered why I should dismiss those arguments.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Because I was left with the impression from our previous exchange that everyone is non binary. I apologise if I'm not grasping it. It's the first time I've discussed this properly so it's uncharted waters for me.


Non-binary people do not identify as male or female, or both at different times or in different ways. 

I'm binary female.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I read some opposing views after the ones on here went quiet and wondered why I should dismiss those arguments.


You don't have to dismiss those arguments. But that's up to you.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Non-binary people do not identify as male or female, or both at different times or in different ways.
> 
> I'm binary female.



At the start of the debate I didn't know what cis was and now I know what binary is. I realise it must be frustrating for you but at least I can't claim ignorance in future (which is genuine btw).


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> You don't have to dismiss those arguments. But that's up to you.



Well, it's theoretical really as I think it's fairly unambiguous as to whether I'd be policing women only spaces or not.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I'm starting to think this discussion would go a whole lot better if an actual trans woman wasn't here.



What do you mean by 'better'?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Well, it's theoretical really as I think it's fairly unambiguous as to whether I'd be policing women only spaces or not.


I think that's part of the point really, and one that Fozzie Bear put really well earlier. It's theoretical for you but it's someone's life to them, where they face exclusion and marginalisation just for who they are.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I'm starting to think this discussion would go a whole lot better if an actual trans woman wasn't here.


i don't agree. i think your input extremely important here. (((AuntiStella)))


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I think that's part of the point really, and one that Fozzie Bear put really well earlier. It's theoretical for you but it's someone's life to them, where they face exclusion and marginalisation just for who they are.



But the same applies to those doing the excluding? If a group of women, for whatever reason, make their space cis only then framing it as exclusion seems synonymous with them being bigots. They have to choose between being labelled bigots or capitulating.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> But the same applies to those doing the excluding? If a group of women, for whatever reason, make their space cis only then framing it as exclusion seems synonymous with them being bigots. They have to choose between being labelled bigots or capitulating.


Most of society is cis only.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> But the same applies to those doing the excluding? If a group of women, for whatever reason, make their space cis only then framing it as exclusion seems synonymous with them being bigots. They have to choose between being labelled bigots or capitulating.


they seem quite happy to be labelled bigots tbh - and not least by other cis women.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Most of society is cis only.



I'm talking about the microcosm of political groups rather than society.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm talking about the microcosm of political groups rather than society.


Trans-exclusionary views aren't limited to tiny political groups though.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Most of society is cis only.


much of society is a cis pit


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> much of society is a cis pit


 You'd better not twitter that


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> they seem quite happy to be labelled bigots tbh - and not least by other cis women.



What I read suggested otherwise. In fact being branded a bigot on the left is social suicide.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> What I read suggested otherwise. In fact being branded a bigot on the left is social suicide.


The ones who have been attacking me on Twitter don't seem bothered. In fact they seem to revel in it.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> You'd better not twitter that


i am offering it to one b.'.m.'. to do with as she will.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Trans-exclusionary views aren't limited to tiny political groups though.



Wider society tend not to make nuanced political arguments about stuff though. I wasn't reading the alternative views on the Mail forum.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> The ones who have been attacking me on Twitter don't seem bothered. In fact they seem to revel in it.



No doubt hiding behind aliases.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i am offering it to one b.'.m.'. to do with as she will.


#cispit at least has the advantage of being funny


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> No doubt hiding behind aliases.


mostly, and with multiple accounts

Though I was once 'savaged' by the Queen TERF Cathy Brennan. Such an honour. She called me Bob.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> mostly, and with multiple accounts
> 
> Though I was once 'savaged' by the Queen TERF Cathy Brennan. Such an honour. She called me Bob.


what did you call her?


----------



## Spymaster (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> At the start of the debate I didn't know what cis was ...



No need to display your ignorance!


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> mostly, and with multiple accounts
> 
> Though I was once 'savaged' by the Queen TERF Cathy Brennan. Such an honour. She called me Bob.


Kinell, someone must have properly stitched you up to attract her attention


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> what did you call her?


I was very polite. I just blocked her. After that I had a week long shit storm!!


----------



## DotCommunist (May 26, 2015)

twitter bravado. So easy to give it large on the web.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Kinell, someone must have properly stitched you up to attract her attention


When I first got nominated as a PPC I was in the media a bit and became trans public enemy numero uno for a few weeks.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> When I first got nominated as a PPC I was in the media a bit and became trans public enemy numero uno for a few weeks.


fear of a trans planet


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> mostly, and with multiple accounts
> 
> Though I was once 'savaged' by the Queen TERF Cathy Brennan. Such an honour. She called me Bob.



Twitter is shit.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> No need to display your ignorance!



It's there for all to see.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Twitter is shit.


i often think of it as twatter


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Twitter is shit.


I mostly like Twitter. It's been good to me. Nearly everyone in my life in the last 5 years I met on Twitter.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i often think of it as twatter


it often is


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> it often is


during the 2011 riots there was so much shit and rumour flying round on it i was put off joining the fucking thing as you couldn't believe about 73% of what was being said.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> What I read suggested otherwise. In fact being branded a bigot on the left is social suicide.


tbh there are so many ways to commit social suicide on the left it is a wonder there's still a semblance of a left.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> during the 2011 riots there was so much shit and rumour flying round on it i was put off joining the fucking thing as you couldn't believe about 73% of what was being said.


I remember that - and trying to calm all it all down. People round my way were hysterical and I ended getting blocked or blocking nearly all of them.

But around 50% of my followers are American or Canadian - progressive ones, and/ or LGBT ones. 

I have very few in London as it happens so my twat quotient is quite low.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 26, 2015)

I retain an intense hostility to the medium as the internet is for arguing imo and its nearly impossible to get a good (read, informative and amusing) row going when each person is reduced to a couple of hundred characters


----------



## likesfish (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I don't disagree with you actually. I think her cartoon was mocking and combative, it was a stupid thing to do in her position.
> 
> My question to you though was because of the way you referred to BME women's meetings as 'little' and as an 'echo chamber.' That was very dismissive of them as a thing rather than BM and her childish behaviour.


That was really ment towards her goldsmith clique which probably was in no danger from being beseiged by loads of men anyways cis trans or otherkin .
 Rather than having bme women only meetings in general my fault for not making it clear.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I retain an intense hostility to the medium as the internet is for arguing imo and its nearly impossible to get a good (read, informative and amusing) row going when each person is reduced to a couple of hundred characters


yeh but it's also nearly impossible to get a good (read, informative and amusing) row going when they're reduced to 10,000 characters as so many threads here demonstrate.


----------



## J Ed (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> during the 2011 riots there was so much shit and rumour flying round on it i was put off joining the fucking thing as you couldn't believe about 73% of what was being said.



I wonder fairly often what the reaction to the same riots would be like now, I bet it would be a bit different.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

J Ed said:


> I wonder fairly often what the reaction to the same riots would be like now, I bet it would be a bit different.


let's see how it turns out this summer then.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> I mostly like Twitter. It's been good to me. Nearly everyone in my life in the last 5 years I met on Twitter.



I like urban because whilst you still get to argue you're not continually going through the ABCs with twats. The temptation would be too strong on Twitter to not go toe to toe with idiots and the 140 character limit would frustrate my invective.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh there are so many ways to commit social suicide on the left it is a wonder there's still a semblance of a left.



We need 'still part of the skeleton crew' sewn onto our tweed jackets.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I like urban because whilst you still get to argue you're not continually going through the ABCs with twats. The temptation would be too strong on Twitter to not go toe to toe with idiots and the 140 character limit would frustrate my invective.


I like the character restriction on Twitter. I think its forced me to become better at writing and better at arguing.

Normally if I find someone I want to discuss stuff with properly we go elsewhere.

It's been excellent for me to get a lot of my trans awareness stuff out there though - and before that geo politics stuff.

Oh and I use it to help publicise really good campaigners who just do not have enough followers, and who I think deserve a bigger platform.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> We need 'still part of the skeleton crew' sewn onto our tweed jackets.


the tailor's phoned, you can pick up your tweed, the elbow patches are fixed.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 26, 2015)

J Ed said:


> I wonder fairly often what the reaction to the same riots would be like now, I bet it would be a bit different.


inj terms of sympathy or state response? Cos I think the OB would go radio rental and start cracking heads much sooner that last time.


----------



## Spymaster (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It's there for all to see.



Aye. So was mine. It's been an informative thread as far as learning new terminology is concerned.

I've learned to watch gender threads from a distance though.


----------



## J Ed (May 26, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> inj terms of sympathy or state response? Cos I think the OB would go radio rental and start cracking heads much sooner that last time.



Sympathy to an extent, although I think you are right about the police and probably there would be even less sympathy from some right-wingers who think that their racism and classism has been vindicated and legitimised by the crueller world of 2015.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> Aye. So was mine. It's been an informative thread as far as learning new terminology is concerned.
> 
> I've learned to watch gender threads from a distance though.



Like any cis male privileged fule kno


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Like any cis male privileged fule kno


i'll tell you one person who has been notable by his absence, and that's johnny vodka. i think he's done well not to get embroiled in this.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

The problem with conceptualising gender as binary is that "binary" implies mutually exclusive opposites.  I don't even have well-defined templates of "man" and "woman" to work off, let alone something that allows me to judge whether these definitions are mutually exclusive of eachother.  

So it's not an individual's self-identification I take issue with at all -- as far as I am concerned, each individual is best place to decide for themselves who they fundamentally are .  No, it's the very framework of the gender discussion.  There seems to be an awful lot conceptually that just gets taken for granted, as if it is a given.  But discussing the implications of a social construct without examining what that social construct actually is in the first place is doomed to endless, repeated misunderstanding.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

I don't personally conceptualise gender as binary. That's not too say that I don't identify as binary.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i'll tell you one person who has been notable by his absence, and that's johnny vodka. i think he's done well not to get embroiled in this.



Maybe once he discovers transwomen are women he'll have plenty to say on the topic.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I don't personally conceptualise gender as binary. That's not too say that I don't identify as binary.


Then what use is the word "binary", if you are meaning it in different ways about the same thing in subsequent sentences?

What do you mean when you say you (might) "identify as binary"?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Then what use is the word "binary", if you are meaning it in different ways about the same thing in subsequent sentences?
> 
> What do you mean when you say you (might) "identify as binary"?


For me (although others may feel differently) binary indicates either end of the gender, sex and sexual orientation continuums.

I identify as binary because I feel I'm a woman/female, straight and also cis.


----------



## Spymaster (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i'll tell you one person who has been notable by his absence, and that's johnny vodka. i think he's done well not to get embroiled in this.



There've only been a handful of people posting for the last 30 odd pages, tbf. 

Everyone else has either bailed-out completely or are watching and thinking "fuck that!"


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> For me (although others may feel differently) binary indicates either end of the gender, sex and sexual orientation continuums.
> 
> I identify as binary because I feel I'm a woman/female, straight and also cis.


But you are still suggesting that gender is a continuum that has two ends.  That one can be "either end" of gender.  That does imply each "end" is mutually exclusive of each other.  What is the evidence for this?  _What definition or template are we even working from?_


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> kabbes http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...icer-facing-sack.335058/page-22#post-13906516 any chance of an answer?


kabbes any chance of an answer?


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

I think the problem is starting with biological sex which, with rare exceptions, does have a clearly identifiable bifurcation, and extrapolating from that to gender.  So the temptation is to talk of "opposite" genders or "binary" genders.  But why should _any _of that apply, the moment we accept that gender is divorced from biological sex?  Maybe there is no easily definable gender at all.  Maybe there are 500 genders.  There are so many unspoken and unchallenged assumptions here, it makes my head hurt.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> But you are still suggesting that gender is a continuum that has two ends.  That one can be "either end" of gender.  That does imply each "end" is mutually exclusive of each other.  What is the evidence for this?  _What definition or template are we even working from?_


Maybe binary as a term will lose meaning once the concept of continuum is more readily accepted. For now it's a working hypothesis subject to change. Further, I think gender is what we do (which may vary with time and circumstances) rather than what we are, which is the performativity angle.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

It's possible to have a continuum from a to b though, isn't it?


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Maybe binary as a term will lose meaning once the concept of continuum is more readily accepted. For now it's a working hypothesis subject to change. Further, I think gender is what we do (which may vary with time and circumstances) rather than what we are, which is the performativity angle.


The problem is not the continuum, it's the one-dimensional nature of the concept.  It's a line with two ends.  But what if gender is multi-dimensional?  (1,0) is not opposite to (0,1).  These are not a pair of binary states; the continuum is not well-ordered.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's possible to have a continuum from a to b though, isn't it?


Talking across eachother here a bit, but the problem arises when the continuum requires multiple dimensions.

GIve me credit here, I'm desperately avoiding talking maths.  But it's hard to avoid when we get into what are technically known as metric spaces.  Two points within the same space cannot necessarily be readily compared or put into an order.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> The problem is not the continuum, it's the one-dimensional nature of the concept.  It's a line with two ends.  But what if gender is multi-dimensional?  (1,0) is not opposite to (0,1).  These are not a pair of binary states; the continuum is not well-ordered.


If you think of gender as what you do rather than what you are, it doesn't seem as one-dimensional because it varies with time and circumstances (or not, depedning on the individual).


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> I think the problem is starting with biological sex which, with rare exceptions, does have a clearly identifiable bifurcation, and extrapolating from that to gender.  So the temptation is to talk of "opposite" genders or "binary" genders.  But why should _any _of that apply, the moment we accept that gender is divorced from biological sex?  Maybe there is no easily definable gender at all.  Maybe there are 500 genders.  There are so many unspoken and unchallenged assumptions here, it makes my head hurt.



How to kill a maths genius through the power of identity politics.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

OK, suppose I like apples more than oranges and I like peanuts more than cashews.  Fruit exists on one dimension and nuts on another.  But I can't compare fruit to nuts.  I am not opposite to somebody that likes oranges and peanuts, for example.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> OK, suppose I like apples more than oranges and I like peanuts more than cashews.  Fruit exists on one dimension and nuts on another.  But I can't compare fruit to nuts.  I am not opposite to somebody that likes oranges and peanuts, for example.


How about if you like all nuts but some days you like cashews and some days you don't want any nuts at all?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> OK, suppose I like apples more than oranges and I like peanuts more than cashews.  Fruit exists on one dimension and nuts on another.  But I can't compare fruit to nuts.  I am not opposite to somebody that likes oranges and peanuts, for example.


yeh. but at least you see that oranges are not the only fruit.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> If you think of gender as what you do rather than what you are, it doesn't seem as one-dimensional because it varies with time and circumstances (or not, depedning on the individual).


But what I do also exists on multiple dimensions.  

Taking it back to the specific subject at hand: my "maleness", for example, is almost totally incomparable to that of Mike Tyson.  So much so, that I have to ask if there is any template of "male" that encompasses us both and yet remains useful to this kind of analysis.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> How about if you like all nuts but some days you like cashews and some days you don't want any nuts at all?


Well quite -- that just makes it even _more_ complicated, as if the lack of well-ordering on the set isn't already difficult enough.

As I say, I have to reject the whole framework, which is why I find the subsequent discussions that beg the question so difficult to deal with.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> But what I do also exists on multiple dimensions.
> 
> Taking it back to the specific subject at hand: my "maleness", for example, is almost totally incomparable to that of Mike Tyson.  So much so, that I have to ask if there is any template of "male" that encompasses us both and yet remains useful to this kind of analysis.


There may not be. But (our) society is ordered around the binary concepts of man and woman even if people don't fit that binary. Or if they do fit the binary, but they're stuck in a different biological binary of male and female.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Liking nuts seems the worst analogy ever.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> There may not be. But (our) society is ordered around the binary concepts of man and woman even if people don't fit that binary. Or if they do fit the binary, but they're stuck in a different biological binary of male and female.


Right, I totally get that, and I do get stuck on that.  And people have to do what they have to do to get by in the imperfect world we live in.  But on a different level, I don't think we collectively help improve this state of affairs by pretending that the binary concepts are in any way helpful or valid.  These binary concepts of man and woman -- what actually _are_ they?  Seriously.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Well quite -- that just makes it even _more_ complicated, as if the lack of well-ordering on the set isn't already difficult enough.
> 
> As I say, I have to reject the whole framework, which is why I find the subsequent discussions that beg the question so difficult to deal with.


I'd point you in the direction of Judith Butler but that might be unkind  I'm informed that her partner's writing, Wendy Brown, might be easier to read but it's from a slightly different angle.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Right, I totally get that, and I do get stuck on that.  And people have to do what they have to do to get by in the imperfect world we live in.  But on a different level, I don't think we collectively help improve this state of affairs by pretending that the binary concepts are in any way helpful or valid.  These binary concepts of man and woman -- what actually _are_ they?  Seriously.


I agree that they're not particularly helpful, but they're a starting point for discussion.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I agree that they're not particularly helpful, but they're a starting point for discussion.


... but only if we define them first.

And those definitions have been asked for multiple times in this thread (starting with Thora, as it happens), but _nobody _has attempted to actually tackle them.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> ... but only if we define them first.
> 
> And those definitions have been asked for multiple times in this thread (starting with Thora, as it happens), but _nobody _has attempted to actually tackle them.


and when you've been asked something multiple times you've hardly covered yourself in glory by answering.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> ... but only if we define them first.
> 
> And those definitions have been asked for multiple times in this thread (starting with Thora, as it happens), but _nobody _has attempted to actually tackle them.


The reason that it's difficult is because it's a many layered answer which changes over time for many individuals. It's easier to start with how society is structured and seems to define it because at least then we can establish what it is that we agree with or reject.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> The reason that it's difficult is because it's a many layered answer which changes over time for many individuals. It's easier to start with how society is structured and seems to define it because at least then we can establish what it is that we agree with or reject.


OK, that works for me.  So how does society define what it means to be a man?  And how does society define what it means to be a woman?  And what proportion of the population are actually captured by these definitions?


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Right, I totally get that, and I do get stuck on that.  And people have to do what they have to do to get by in the imperfect world we live in.  But on a different level, I don't think we collectively help improve this state of affairs by pretending that the binary concepts are in any way helpful or valid.  These binary concepts of man and woman -- what actually _are_ they?  Seriously.



why not take a walk outside and see how many people you can spot acting outside of the binary?


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> OK, that works for me.  So how does society define what it means to be a man?  And how
> does society define what it means to be a woman?  And what proportion of the population are actually captured by these definitions?



when you meet someone for the first time, on what signifiers do you think of them as man or woman.  their genitals?


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> when you meet someone for the first time, on what signifiers do you think of them as man or woman.  their genitals?


Clothes, hair, voice pitch, body shape.

That definition is so broad, though, I come back to questioning how useful it actually is.  What does that tell me about them as a person?  Pretty much nothing, frankly.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> why not take a walk outside and see how many people you can spot acting outside of the binary?


The binary what, though?  What binary?


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Clothes, hair, voice pitch, body shape.
> 
> That definition is so broad, though, I come back to questioning how useful it actually is.  What does that tell me about them as a person?  Pretty much nothing, frankly.



it tells you whether their gender is male or female and I'm willing to bet that in 99.9% of cases you are correct.  thats what gender is, not whether you like boxing or unicorns.  you may not like that we live in a gendered society, niether do I, but you play the game just like everyone else.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Clothes, hair, voice pitch, body shape.
> 
> That definition is so broad, though, I come back to questioning how useful it actually is.  What does that tell me about them as a person?  Pretty much nothing, frankly.


It doesn't tell you anything about them as a person. Personality is yet another aspect though


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It doesn't tell you anything about them as a person. Personality is yet another aspect though


kabbes more interested in appearances than substance


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It doesn't tell you anything about them as a person. Personality is yet another aspect though


personality goes a long way


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> it tells you whether their gender is male or female and I'm willing to bet that in 99.9% of cases you are correct.  thats what gender is, not whether you like boxing or unicorns.  you may not like that we live in a gendered society, niether do I, but you play the game just like everyone else.


OK, with you so far.

But is that really it?  We leap from that extraordinarily simplistic, uninformative and banal template to something so important that individuals are willing to redefine their whole lives around it?  It seems to me that there is rather more to it than that.


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

a little goes a long way, a lot can be quite annoying


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> personality goes a long way



Look at Jimmy Savile.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> a little goes a long way, a lot can be quite annoying


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> OK, with you so far.
> 
> But is that really it?  We leap from that extraordinarily simplistic, uninformative and banal template to something so important that individuals are willing to redefine their whole lives around it?  It seems to me that there is rather more to it than that.


It's rather difficult, I imagine, to live out of step with society - even if society is simplistic, uninformative and banal.


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> OK, with you so far.
> 
> But is that really it?  We leap from that extraordinarily simplistic, uninformative and banal template to something so important that individuals are willing to redefine their whole lives around it?  It seems to me that there is rather more to it than that.



you define your whole life around it, we all do virtually.  I'll take a punt, and apologies of I'm wrong, but I'm willing to bet you dress everyday, as a man, I bet you sit like a man and walk like a man, I bet you ornament yourself like a man (no make up, one earring, a masculine tattoo whatever etc), I bet if you use male toiletries you use ones that society, or marketing departments within that society decide make you smell like a man, I bet you use male pronouns to describe yourself, and male toilets, and perhaps you go even further and have typically male interests, or a typically male job, or like to fuck like a man, and I;m almost certain you think of yourself, should anyone ask you, as a man

but it doesn't define, oh no 'Mr' gender warrior


----------



## equationgirl (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> The ones who have been attacking me on Twitter don't seem bothered. In fact they seem to revel in it.


I'm sorry you're dealing with their shit. Their behaviour is inexcusable.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's rather difficult, I imagine, to live out of step with society - even if society is simplistic, uninformative and banal.


When somebody says they knew from age 4 that they were the wrong gender, is it really because they don't conform to my list? Or is it something else -- some template of what it _means_ to be a man or a woman?

But does that make sense?  What does a 4 year old know about what it means to be a man or a woman?  I don't think I really know and I'm 38.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> you define your whole life around it, we all do virtually.  I'll take a punt, and apologies of I'm wrong, but I'm willing to bet you dress everyday, as a man, I bet you sit like a man and walk like a man, I bet you ornament yourself like a man (no make up, one earring, a masculine tattoo whatever etc), I bet if you use male toiletries you use ones that society, or marketing departments within that society decide make you smell like a man, I bet you use male pronouns to describe yourself, and male toilets, and perhaps you go even further and have typically male interests, or a typically male job, or like to fuck like a man, and I;m almost certain you think of yourself, should anyone ask you, as a man
> 
> but it doesn't define, oh no 'Mr' gender warrior


The last sentence seems a bit aggressive.  No need for that.

I do most things like many men, but equally not like many other men.  There are other things I do like many women but not like other women.

I am aware that I am being a bit disingenuous with that statement, but I think so are you.  You are supposing that (a) there is inherently such a thing as, for example, dressing like a man.  You are also not in any way addressing where these things come from.


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> When somebody says they knew from age 4 that they were the wrong gender, is it really because they don't conform to my list? Or is it something else -- some template of what it _means_ to be a man or a woman?



it suggests to me that there is something going on we don't yet understand, possibly with some biological as well as social driver


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> you define your whole life around it, we all do virtually.  I'll take a punt, and apologies of I'm wrong, but I'm willing to bet you dress everyday, as a man, I bet you sit like a man and walk like a man, I bet you ornament yourself like a man (no make up, one earring, a masculine tattoo whatever etc), I bet if you use male toiletries you use ones that society, or marketing departments within that society decide make you smell like a man, I bet you use male pronouns to describe yourself, and male toilets, and perhaps you go even further and have typically male interests, or a typically male job, or like to fuck like a man, and I;m almost certain you think of yourself, should anyone ask you, as a man
> 
> but it doesn't define, oh no 'Mr' gender warrior



That's a rather aggressive retort tbh.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> When somebody says they knew from age 4 that they were the wrong gender, is it really because they don't conform to my list? Or is it something else -- some template of what it _means_ to be a man or a woman?
> 
> But does that make sense?  What does a 4 year old know about what it means to be a man or a woman?  I don't think I really know and I'm 38.


I don't know because I have the advantage of being cis. All I can do is imagine what it is like to feel essentially in line with what society has constructed for my gender, but disadvantaged by my biology.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (May 26, 2015)

I find it easier to imagine Kabbes in a clean, well pressed frock than sporting either a tattoo or an earring.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> it suggests to me that there is something going on we don't yet understand, possibly with some biological as well as social driver


It suggests to me that we subsume children from before they can speak in a whole mythology of what being a man means and what being a woman means.  But this mythology is reactionary, simplistic, old-fashioned and inherent misogynistic.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> I find it easier to imagine Kabbes in a clean, well pressed frock than sporting either a tattoo or an earring.


I find it easier to imagine kabbes as a brain, without the needs and trappings of a body.


----------



## kabbes (May 26, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> I find it easier to imagine Kabbes in a clean, well pressed frock than sporting either a tattoo or an earring.


To be fair, I have worn a frock but I would never dream of getting a tattoo of any kind.


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> The last sentence seems a bit aggressive.  No need for that.
> 
> I do most things like many men, but equally not like many other men.  There are other things I do like many women but not like other women.
> 
> I am aware that I am being a bit disingenuous with that statement, but I think so are you.  You are supposing that (a) there is inherently such a thing as, for example, dressing like a man.  You are also not in any way addressing where these things come from.



apologies, it was a bit aggresive, didn't mean it to come out that way.  I don't belive there is an inherent thing as dressing like a man, I believe there are strict social codes, rigourously policed from the day we are born, which force us into reproducing the key signifiers of gender - dress, appearance, poise, identity, and that almost everyone does it.  that causes great psychological discomfort to some people, often combined with some form of not yet understood dysphoria about their own bodies so they seek to transcend that.  when they do they are often attacked for reproducing gender roles, or being essentialist, often by people who also reproduce those gender roles, but just the one they were assigned at birth.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> and the 140 character limit would frustrate my invective.



dunno - that's 35 4 letter words...


----------



## Santino (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> and when you've been asked something multiple times you've hardly covered yourself in glory by answering.


FFS, he's got you on ignore, you beef-witted poltroon.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Puddy_Tat said:


> dunno - that's 35 4 letter words...



After your edit... 

Misunderstood lol yeah

Cunt cunt cunt


----------



## Red Cat (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I do. I don't support labelling people bigots though without fully hearing their arguments first.



Seems to me that there are arguments that happen elsewhere, on twitter say, and someone says something here that sounds a bit similar and its as though that statement then changes from a statement made in the context of what we know about that poster and is instead seen in the context of the misogynistic or phobic or racist argument made elsewhere, as though that particular point is logically part of an argument, as if its code for something, that is unmistakeably bigoted, and an example of privilege.

I've had this experience more and more on urban over the past year or 2, and I'm a fairly politically thoughtful person, and I end up thinking, oh, I've said something wrong there, looks like what I've said there is some trope I'm not even aware of. So much potential for tripping up.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Santino said:


> FFS, he's got you on ignore, you beef-witted poltroon.


i thought he might be one of the 30-something losers but was prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. btw you can fuck off with your accusations of cowardice you fly-ridden gobshite.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> Seems to me that there are arguments that happen elsewhere, on twitter say, and someone says something here that sounds a bit similar and its as though that statement then changes from a statement made in the context of what we know about that poster and is instead seen in the context of the misogynistic or phobic or racist argument made elsewhere, as though that particular point is logically part of an argument, as if its code for something, that is unmistakeably bigoted, and an example of privilege.
> 
> I've had this experience more and more on urban over the past year or 2, and I'm a fairly politically thoughtful person, and I end up thinking, oh, I've said something wrong there, looks like what I've said there is some trope I'm not even aware of. So much potential for tripping up.



Triggers is the new fangled word for it I think. It's like something out of 1984. I didn't see anyone being bigoted but because their opinions sailed too close to other stuff - guilt. This discussion has been the poorer for it imo.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Triggers is the new fangled word for it I think. It's like something out of 1984. I didn't see anyone being bigoted but because their opinions sailed too close to other stuff - guilt. This discussion has been the poorer for it imo.


It's often difficult to see the markers of bigotry when you don't understand the concepts and you're not on the receiving end. It doesn't mean they're not there, though. And the failure of some people to acknowledge that has meant that this discussion has been poorer for it imo.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's often difficult to see the markers of bigotry when you don't understand the concepts and you're not on the receiving end. It doesn't mean they're not there, though. And the failure of some people to acknowledge that has meant that this discussion has been poorer for it imo.



So we need to identify who is qualified to acknowledge the bigotry and who those bigots are. I'm guessing you're the authority on this one?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So we need to identify who is qualified to acknowledge the bigotry and who those bigots are. I'm guessing you're the authority on this one?


I'm the authority on my own opinion and you saying "there's no bigotry" doesn't change it, frankly.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I'm the authority on my own opinion and you saying "there's no bigotry" doesn't change it, frankly.



So who are the bigots?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So who are the bigots?


The trans exclusionists.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Triggers is the new fangled word for it I think. It's like something out of 1984. I didn't see anyone being bigoted but because their opinions sailed too close to other stuff - guilt. This discussion has been the poorer for it imo.



I think the whole 'trigger' thing is about _association_ and the fact that some people haven't yet worked out that some ideas they have are evidence of _internalised prejudice_. None of us are immune to that. It isn't limited to any one subject either. Sometimes we get challenged on something we say and even if we have a right to think and feel a certain way, it doesn't make what we think/feel is _universally _right.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> The trans exclusionists.



Have you read much on McCarthyism?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Have you read much on McCarthyism?


If you're not engaging in Mccarthyism yourself - you'll provide the evidence that excluding trans women isn't bigoted.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> If you're not engaging in Mccarthyism yourself - you'll provide the evidence that excluding trans women isn't bigoted.



We're talking about the behaviour of people on this thread that you're being deliberately vague about. That's why I brought McCarthyism up. Create a social taboo and then police it.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Have you read much on McCarthyism?


You are shitting me.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> The problem with conceptualising gender as binary is that "binary" implies mutually exclusive opposites.  I don't even have well-defined templates of "man" and "woman" to work off, let alone something that allows me to judge whether these definitions are mutually exclusive of eachother.
> 
> So it's not an individual's self-identification I take issue with at all -- as far as I am concerned, each individual is best place to decide for themselves who they fundamentally are .  No, it's the very framework of the gender discussion.  There seems to be an awful lot conceptually that just gets taken for granted, as if it is a given.  But discussing the implications of a social construct without examining what that social construct actually is in the first place is doomed to endless, repeated misunderstanding.



Unfortunately, you also need to understand what "social construct" means, and how the fact of a meaning being socially constructed can limit how the subject is discussed.
Here in the UK we very much still have discursive limitations on how trans is discussed, with a dead weight of decades of broad social and institutional prejudice meaning that "pro" trans currents are suppressed more heavily than "anti" trans currents, which suits power fine - one fewer distinction to deal with.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> We're talking about the behaviour of people on this thread that you're being deliberately vague about. That's why I brought McCarthyism up. Create a social taboo and then police it.


I'm not being vague at all. I'm being specific. It's a social taboo for the same reason racism (for example) is and if you've got evidence it shouldn't be a social taboo any more you'd better produce it rather than slurring me with McCarthyism.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You are shitting me.



I wasn't having a discussion with you but beat your chest if you like.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

What do you think about my post above C66?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I'm not being vague at all. I'm being specific. It's a social taboo for the same reason racism (for example) is and if you've got evidence it shouldn't be a social taboo any more you'd better produce it rather than slurring me with McCarthyism.



You said the trans exclusionists are guilty but refuse to name them or point to their posts. Now either its happening on this thread or I've completely misunderstood various complaints and I apologise.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> You said the trans exclusionists are guilty but refuse to name them or point to their posts. Now either its happening on this thread or I've completely misunderstood various complaints and I apologise.


I refuse to provide you with your fucking witch hunt - you cunt.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> What do you think about my post above C66?



It makes sense.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It makes sense.



So, if it makes sense to you, can you see this conversation a little differently?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I wasn't having a discussion with you but beat your chest if you like.


I really honestly hope you don't truly believe this stuff you're posting. That's all.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I refuse to provide you with your fucking witch hunt - you cunt.



You choose to keep your witch hunt ambiguous. I'm not hunting anyone. I just 'white knight' whatever that gender loaded assertion means.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I really honestly hope you don't truly believe this stuff you're posting. That's all.



What stuff? The fact I don't believe people on this thread were driven by bigotry? How terrible of me.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> You choose to keep your witch hunt ambiguous. I'm not hunting anyone. I just 'white knight' whatever that gender loaded assertion means.


You want a list of names of people that I think are trans exclusionary because you can't work it out for yourself.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> What stuff? The fact I don't believe people on this thread were driven by bigotry? How terrible of me.


It's McCarthyism?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> when you meet someone for the first time, on what signifiers do you think of them as man or woman.  their genitals?


Personally i dont see the genitals of 99.999% of people and im damned sure noone sees mine!!!


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's McCarthyism?



Fair enough. Hyperbole to make a point.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

I've found this thread incredibly depressing btw and it's really made me question wtf I am even doing here, more than anything that I can remember.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

I'm leaving this. It's too polarised.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> You choose to keep your witch hunt ambiguous.



She hasn't been and isn't being ambiguous. You are asking her to name names, which in itself is encouraging her to square up/point the finger at someone.

This conversation has meandered through the very personal and the more general. A lot of questions have been asked and haven't been answered. I still say the detail is important. Unless people are happy to explain what their fears are about being accepting of and/or inclusive of trans* people we can never know..unfortunately that does leave a gaping hole of 'just because' which as you know never suggests anything positive.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm leaving this. It's too polarised.


you on one hand and everyone else on the other


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm leaving this. It's too polarised.



_Binary_ surely


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> If you're not engaging in Mccarthyism yourself - you'll provide the evidence that excluding trans women isn't bigoted.



Are you suggesting it's impossible that there could be any motivation for excluding trans women from women-only spaces other than bigotry?  What about the purely practical argument that it's the best way to ensure that men are kept out, since to allow anyone who purports to identify as a woman could easily be exploited by a cis man seeking to infiltrate?  Personally, I think that's a highly unlikely eventuality, but these women's assessment of risks/priorities might be different from mine - informed by their own experiences, but not based on bigotry.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you on one hand and everyone else on the other



If you do a victory dance I'll piss on your leg.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> Are you suggesting it's impossible that there could be any motivation for excluding trans women from women-only spaces other than bigotry?


 Who knows? The question has been asked repeatedly but no answers/experiences have emerged.




> What about the purely practical argument that it's the best way to ensure hat men are kept out, since to allow anyone who purports to identify as a woman could easily be exploited by a cis man seeking to infiltrate?  (Personally, I think that's a highly unlikely eventuality, but these women's assessment of risks/priorities might be different from mine - informed by their own experiences.)


 Do you have experience of this happening? If not it seems like you are imagining what other people might imagine.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

It's the bathroom argument again.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> If you do a victory dance I'll piss on your leg.


you're too late. piss on your own leg instead.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's the bathroom argument again.


And women who do not conform to what is considered a female appearance can have their genitals checked before entry? 

Masculine looking cis women have already found themselves being excluded from ladies toilets in the US.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Who knows? The question has been asked repeatedly but no answers/experiences have emerged.
> 
> 
> Do you have experience of this happening? If not it seems like you are imagining what other people might imagine.



I think the 'infiltration' argument is one used by some groups which exclude trans women (and referred to earlier in th thread). Personally, I suspect the risk is massively overstated.  But perhaps that's understandable from women who have been abused by men.  And it's not the same thing as being based on bigotry, is it?


----------



## purenarcotic (May 26, 2015)

Excluding trans women from women only spaces is exclusionary because it's excluding women from women only spaces.  I have no idea what genitalia has to do with anything as it's quite unusual to ask anyone accessing a service / a group / whatever that isn't gynaecological in nature to show us their bits to help us determine whether they are a man or a woman. 

I have dipped in and out of the thread so apologies if the above is covered ground.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I think the 'infiltration' argument is one used by some groups which exclude trans women (and referred to earlier in th thread). Personally, I suspect the risk is massively overstated.  But perhaps that's understandable from women who have been abused by men.  And it's not the same thing as being based on bigotry, is it?


I've been abused by men. Why is my non-trans-exclusionary argument less valid?


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> And women who do not conform to what is considered a female appearance can have their genitals checked before entry?
> 
> Masculine looking cis women have already found themselves being excluded from ladies toilets in the US.



It's daft.  And it's consequences are discriminatory.  But that's not the same as being motivated by bigotry.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2015)

There are women - feminists - that *do* argue against being trumped by this bigotry card though. Rightly or wrongly, should their views be dismissed as bigoted?


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I've been abused by men. Why is my non-trans-exclusionary argument less valid?



Becasue the absence of trans women wouldn't make you feel unsafe (in terms of the threat from men) in that space, I assume?

But that's really beside the point.  The issue wasn't the relative strength of the competing arguments, but whether the motivation would be bigoted in that instance.  Would you describe women who organised on the basis of my example as bigots?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I think the 'infiltration' argument is one used by some groups which exclude trans women (and referred to earlier in th thread). Personally, I suspect the risk is massively overstated.  But perhaps that's understandable from women who have been abused by men.  And it's not the same thing as being based on bigotry, is it?



Can we become 'bigots' and exclusionary because of our own experiences of and reactions to prejudice? Yes I think we can. It's a complex thing though and how we reason that to ourselves is the crucial 'detail'.

Which kinda leads back to the subject of the OP actually. Deploying the strategies of 'your' oppressors is a complicated but very real thing in my experience. Internalised prejudice, reactions to prejudice and how we all deal with those things is important.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> Becasue the absence of trans women wouldn't make you feel unsafe (in terms of the threat from men) in that space, I assume?
> 
> But that's really beside the point.  The issue was whether the motivation would be bigoted in that instance.  Would you describe women who organised on the basis of my example as bigots?


I'd feel unsafe if someone did a genital check on me before admitting me to space after I'd been abused by a man. I'd feel abused by the women and the originator of the abuse.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 26, 2015)

kabbes said:


> ... but only if we define them first.
> 
> And those definitions have been asked for multiple times in this thread (starting with Thora, as it happens), but _nobody _has attempted to actually tackle them.



Possibly because a definition (as in definitive description) is precisely what can't be given due to the fact that the normative terms of reference currently exclude the possibility of there being much beyond biological sex and the "traditional" gender roles attached to biological sex. Wider public debate about gender roles, let alone gender itself is only decades old, and terms of reference that encompass all genders and none are in their infancy, relatively speaking.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Can we become 'bigots' and exclusisionary because of our own experiences of and reactions to prejudice? Yes I think we can.
> 
> Which kinda leads back to the subject of the OP actually. Deploying the strategies of 'your' oppressors is a complicated but very real thing in my experience. Internalised prejudice, reactions to prejudice and how we all deal with those things is important.



I absolutely agree that we can become bigots as a result of our own experiences.  But I would hesitate to describe the motivation of the women in my example as bigotry.  Would you?


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I'd feel unsafe if someone did a genital check on me before admitting me to space after I'd been abused by a man. I'd feel abused by the women and the originator of the abuse.



I agree, that would eb a ridiculous state of affairs.  But, again, you're ducking he issue.  In the example I gave, is bigotry the women's motivation to exclude trans women?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I agree, that would eb a ridiculous state of affairs.  But, again, you're ducking he issue.  In the example I gave, is bigotry the women's motivation to exclude trans women?


But this is the issue. How do you suppose that "born women" decide who gets admitted?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 26, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> I find it easier to imagine Kabbes in a clean, well pressed frock than sporting either a tattoo or an earring.



Yep.
And for some reason he's ironing bedsheets.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> But this is the issue. How do you suppose that "born women" decide who gets admitted?



For the purposes of this example, lets assume that this group of cis women coalesced around the fact that they have been abused by men.  And that's their reason for creating a space in which they can feel entirely safe that men won't invade.  Is their decision not to allow trans women to enter (for fear that that such a policy could be abused by cis male 'infiltrators') an act of bigotry?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> For the purposes of this example, lets assume that this group of cis women coalesced around the fact that they have been abused by men.  And that's their reason for creating a space in which they can feel entirely safe that men won't invade.  Is their decision not to allow trans women to enter (for fear that that such a policy could be abused by cis male 'infiltrators') an act of bigotry?


It depends if you consider trans women to be women or not. In any event, admitting a trans woman wouldn't be admitting a man.


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> Are you suggesting it's impossible that there could be any motivation for excluding trans women from women-only spaces other than bigotry?  What about the purely practical argument that it's the best way to ensure that men are kept out, since to allow anyone who purports to identify as a woman could easily be exploited by a cis man seeking to infiltrate?  Personally, I think that's a highly unlikely eventuality, but these women's assessment of risks/priorities might be different from mine - informed by their own experiences, but not based on bigotry.


This is ... odd. Are you suggesting a women's group might exclude trans women (aka _other women_) on the grounds that a bloke might sneak in?  Or are you really suggesting that trans women are actually part of a group whose claim to being female is disputed?


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It depends if you consider trans women to be women or not.



And if they considered trans women to be women, but felt that the risks to the existing members of opening up the possibility of male infiltration too great? Are they bigots then?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Triggers is the new fangled word for it I think. It's like something out of 1984. I didn't see anyone being bigoted but because their opinions sailed too close to other stuff - guilt. This discussion has been the poorer for it imo.


Forcing people to police their language, to enact codes of self-governance so as not to cause offence to others is worrying. Requiring people to conform to social norms with regard to language-use is one thing - swearing in front of kids not being generally tolerated, for example - but expecting people to police *all* their language on the off-chance that someone will be offended? That's anti-social (in the wide sense).


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Wilf said:


> This is ... odd. Are you suggesting a women's group might exclude trans women (aka _other women_) on the grounds that a bloke might sneak in?  Or are you really suggesting that trans women are actually part of a group whose claim to being female is disputed?



As I understand it, some women's groups are suggesting that their exclusion of trans women is based on the former i.e. not in denying trans women's womanhood, but from the possible consequences of allowing anyone who identifies as a female to join.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> In any event, admitting a trans woman wouldn't be admitting a man.



No.  But admitting anyone who purported to identify as a woman would facilitate entry by cis men for nefarious purposes.


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

purenarcotic said:


> Excluding trans women from women only spaces is exclusionary because it's excluding women from women only spaces.  .


 That rather gets to the heart of the whole thing.


----------



## dylanredefined (May 26, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> so as a white working class male who is CIS (i think) i'll just let all of her non-binary crew and BME fight on without me as i am clearly not wanted in the march toward revolution.
> 
> it splits people up this shit.


 I agree with that it is not helpful and could have been done without getting people upset about it.


Athos said:


> For the purposes of this example, lets assume that this group of cis women coalesced around the fact that they have been abused by men.  And that's their reason for creating a space in which they can feel entirely safe that men won't invade.  Is their decision not to allow trans women to enter (for fear that that such a policy could be abused by cis male 'infiltrators') an act of bigotry?


If she is also a victim I would say yes.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> No.  But admitting anyone who purported to identify as a woman would facilitate entry by cis men for nefarious purposes.


How would they know without a fairly extensive series of tests on all abused women that seek refuge?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> No.  But admitting anyone who purported to identify as a woman would facilitate entry by cis men for nefarious purposes.


For anyone who wasn't aware of it, btw, the "bathroom argument" was one that was and is deployed for discrimination in schools. It rests on the idea that trans women are men pretending to be women. It makes a pretence at saying that there are some who are "okay", but there's a danger that men will pretend to be women to gain access to female-only spaces for predatory purposes.


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> Are you suggesting it's impossible that there could be any motivation for excluding trans women from women-only spaces other than bigotry?  What about the purely practical argument that it's the best way to ensure that men are kept out, since to allow anyone who purports to identify as a woman could easily be exploited by a cis man seeking to infiltrate?  Personally, I think that's a highly unlikely eventuality, but these women's assessment of risks/priorities might be different from mine - informed by their own experiences, but not based on bigotry.



the rape crisis guidelines I posted earlier cover this:



> Sometimes women’s refuges are concerned that abusive men will put on women’s clothing
> to gain access to women’s refuges. This concern doesn’t match the experience of refuges
> that have adopted policies that accept transgender women. The authors of this guidance
> have never heard of a scenario like this happening and believe that it is extremely unlikely
> ...



I think you have to understand the pragmatism involved in managing womens only service provision (as opposed to political spaces).  risk assessment is a big factor, they are not really safe spaces, just hopefully safer spaces or as safe as possible spaces.  that means compromises and risk taking, for example is a quiet middle aged trans-women with no convictions really more of a risk than a heroin dependent cis-women with a string of convictions for violence?  when you start dealing the the actuality rather than the theory then the way forward is really just a matter of common sense.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> How would they know without a fairly extensive series of tests on all abused women that seek refuge?



You keep ducking the question.  In the example I've given, is it possible that the exclusion could be motivated by something other than bigotry?


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> How would they know without a fairly extensive series of tests on all abused women that seek refuge?


If they did some women would get a shock when they turn out be not women, but intersex men.


----------



## emanymton (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> Becasue the absence of trans women wouldn't make you feel unsafe (in terms of the threat from men) in that space, I assume?
> 
> But that's really beside the point.  The issue wasn't the relative strength of the competing arguments, but whether the motivation would be bigoted in that instance.  Would you describe women who organised on the basis of my example as bigots?


I think it is the case that because somewhere is a women only space that does not necessarily mean it is open to all women. I am sure that there plenty of valid reasons for excluding some women  (cis or trans) in specific cases. But a blanket ban on all trans women does sound a bit like bigotry to me. Thinking back to the earlier arguments about where should the line be drawn. I don't think you can draw one, you just need the people who run these spaces to make decisions as best they can in specific cases, accepting that mistakes will be made.


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> As I understand it, some women's groups are suggesting that their exclusion of trans women is based on the former i.e. not in denying trans women's womanhood, but from the possible consequences of allowing anyone who identifies as a female to join.


But clearly that *is* denying trans women's womanhood.  It puts them into the group of people who might only be 'identifying' as women but are not accepted as such. By definition it is treating trans women differently to cis women - and treating them different at exactly the point of deciding who can come into a women's space.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> You keep ducking the question.  In the example I've given, is it possible that the exclusion could be motivated by something other than bigotry?


It might be motivated by fear. But then, fear is often at the root of bigotry.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> For anyone who wasn't aware of it, btw, the "bathroom argument" was one that was and is deployed for discrimination in schools. It rests on the idea that trans women are men pretending to be women. It makes a pretence at saying that there are some who are "okay", but there's a danger that men will pretend to be women to gain access to female-only spaces for predatory purposes.



And, as I've explained, I'm not persuaded by it.  But, that's not to say that some women aren't, such that the decision to include trans women is motivated by their prioritisation of risk, rather that bigotry.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> You keep ducking the question.  In the example I've given, is it possible that the exclusion could be motivated by something other than bigotry?



Why don't you tell us what you think?

I responded to you earlier and was clear that I think 'bigotry' as in the act of doing, can develop as a reaction to direct experiences and/or internalised prejudice. The reason someone becomes or does this may be different but the result is the same is it not?


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> the rape crisis guidelines I posted earlier cover this:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you have to understand the pragmatism involved in managing womens only service provision (as opposed to political spaces).  risk assessment is a big factor, they are not really safe spaces, just hopefully safer spaces or as safe as possible spaces.  that means compromises and risk taking, for example is a quiet middle aged trans-women with no convictions really more of a risk than a heroin dependent cis-women with a string of convictions for violence?  when you start dealing the the actuality rather than the theory then the way forward is really just a matter of common sense.



I accept that.  And, as I said earlier on the thread, on balance, I'm instinctively pro-inclusion.  But I remain a bit uncomfortable with people telling a group of women (who have good reason to seek to exclude men) how they should manage their own safety, and who should or shouldn't be allowed into their spaces, especially when that is often accompanied by them being written off as bigots.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> It might be motivated by fear. But then, fear is often at the root of bigotry.



Are they bigots, then?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> And, as I've explained, I'm not persuaded by it.  But, that's not to say that some women aren't, such that the decision to include trans women is motivated by their prioritisation of risk, rather that bigotry.


I don't understand the purpose of this line of argument. Can you explain what position you are trying to promote here?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I accept that.  And, as I said earlier on the thread, on balance, I'm instinctively pro-inclusion.  But I remain a bit uncomfortable with people telling a group of women (who have good reason to seek to exclude men) how they should manage their own safety, and who should or shouldn't be allowed into their spaces, especially when that is often accompanied by them being written off as bigots.




This only works if you don't think trans* women are women. It also ignores the fact that some trans* women have also had experiences of abuse, by men.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Why don't you tell us what you think?
> 
> I responded to you earlier and was clear that I think 'bigotry' as in the act of doing, can develop as a reaction to direct experiences and/or internalised prejudice. The reason someone becomes or does this may be different but the result is the same is it not?



To the limited extent to which it's my place as a man to say, I'm pro-inclusion.  But against dismissing every woman who thinks differently as a bigot (whilst accepting that some are).


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I accept that.  And, as I said earlier on the thread, on balance, I'm instinctively pro-inclusion.  But I remain a bit uncomfortable with people telling a group of women (who have good reason to seek to exclude men) how they should manage their own safety, and who should or shouldn't be allowed into their spaces, especially when that is often accompanied by them being written off as bigots.



would you accept a womens only hostel excluding gay women because it made some residents feel uncomfortable or unsafe (this used to be an issue in both men and womens hostel service provision by the way)?


----------



## spanglechick (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> Are they bigots, then?


homophobes who would deny gay, lesbian and bisexual people from certain spaces (such as gym changing rooms) may be motivated by their prioritisation of risk...  but it still also makes them bigots.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> Are they bigots, then?


Are you asking if fear-based bigotry is less bad than supremacist-type bigotry? My answer to that is that it's more understandable, but just as marginalising.


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> No.  But admitting anyone who purported to identify as a woman would facilitate entry by cis men for nefarious purposes.


But you're doing it again! Why would you only select trans women as the group who put at risk the 'women only' principle?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> To the limited extent to which it's my place as a man to say, I'm pro-inclusion.  But against dismissing every woman who thinks differently as a bigot (whilst accepting that some are).



Is everyone who has ever said or thought something racist an out and out racist?

Bigotry, as a thing, can be something temporal and isolated to a specific act/behaviour/thought.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 26, 2015)

I work for an organisation that has supported trans women fleeing abuse.  We have housed them in our safe, women only accommodation because they are women fleeing abuse.  If other residents have an issue then the support staff will talk to them about it and appropriately challenge their views.  Not that trans has anything to do with sexuality like but as an example, we sometimes get refuge residents concerned if a lesbian woman accesses the service as they have children.  We challenge that view and make it clear lesbian women are as entitled as anyone else to access the service.

Being a victim of abuse does not make you immune to challenge.  Obviously what you say and how you challenge is important but if challenge needs to take place then it needs to take place.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

purenarcotic said:


> I work for an organisation that has supported trans women fleeing abuse.  We have housed them in our safe, women only accommodation because they are women fleeing abuse.  If other residents have an issue then the support staff will talk to them about it and appropriately challenge their views.  Not that trans has anything to do with sexuality like but as an example, we sometimes get refuge residents concerned if a lesbian woman accesses the service as they have children.  We challenge that view and make it clear lesbian women are as entitled as anyone else to access the service.
> 
> Being a victim of abuse does not make you immune to challenge.  Obviously what you say and how you challenge is important but if challenge needs to take place then it needs to take place.


This makes me feel a whole lot better


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Wilf said:


> But clearly that *is* denying trans women's womanhood.  It puts them into the group of people who might only be 'identifying' as women but are not accepted as such. By definition it is treating trans women differently to cis women - and treating them different at exactly the point of deciding who can come into a women's space.



The groups run on this basis would argue not; that women-only groups are never open to all women - some women will always be excluded, without their womanhood being denied.

But, as I've already said, it's not necessarily an argument I find persuasive.  Simply it was to demonstrate that there could be motivations (no matter how misconceived) other than bigotry.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> The groups run on this basis would argue not; that women-only groups are never open to all women - some women will always be excluded, without their womanhood being denied.
> 
> But, as I've already said, it's not necessarily an argument I find persuasive.  Simply it was to demonstrate that there could be motivations (no matter how misconceived) other than bigotry.


I don't think they have other motivations tbh.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I don't understand the purpose of this line of argument. Can you explain what position you are trying to promote here?



I'm trying to promote the possibility of meaningful debate where any woman who suggests anything contrary to the prevailing view isn't dismissed as a bigot.


----------



## Red Cat (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Is everyone who has ever said or thought something racist an out and out racist?
> 
> Bigotry, as a thing, can be something temporal and isolated to a specific act/behaviour/thought.



I suppose I tend to think of bigotry as a strong prejudice resistant to change rather than something temporal.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

smokedout said:


> would you accept a womens only hostel excluding gay women because it made some residents feel uncomfortable or unsafe (this used to be an issue in both men and womens hostel service provision by the way)?



No, but I haven't said I would accept the exclusion of trans women - quite the opposite!  The point I was making is that such a position isn't necessarily motivated by bigotry.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I'm trying to promote the possibility of meaningful debate where any woman who suggests anything contrary to the prevailing view being dismissed as a bigot.


tl:dr you've broken something and you are not defending women


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> This only works if you don't think trans* women are women. It also ignores the fact that some trans* women have also had experiences of abuse, by men.



No it doesn't.  I think trans women are women.  I also believe in all women's right to define their own gender.  There's an inherent tension there.  Instinctively, I resolve in pro-inclusion.  But that doesn't mean I have to write off all exclusionary views as bigoted.


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> The groups run on this basis would argue not; that women-only groups are never open to all women - some women will always be excluded, without their womanhood being denied.
> .


Yes, but we are talking here about 'women's groups', not 'black women's groups', 'lesbian women's groups' etc.  You are coming up with a reason to choose trans women as the 1 group you would exclude (or at least excuse the exclusion of) from a women's group.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Are you asking if fear-based bigotry is less bad than supremacist-type bigotry? My answer to that is that it's more understandable, but just as marginalising.



Are they bigots?


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

'Look, we accept you are women, but if we let you in you might get blokes coming in'.  FFS!


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> Are they bigots?


Quite possibly. Give us an example.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Wilf said:


> But you're doing it again! Why would you only select trans women as the group who put at risk the 'women only' principle?



I guess they argue the practicalities; by opening the group to anyone who identifies as a woman (which is what you'd have to do to properly welcome trans women), you're offering far more opportunity to men to infiltrate.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Quite possibly. Give us an example.



Read back, you'll see one I posed.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Wilf said:


> 'Look, we accept you are women, but if we let you in you might get blokes coming in'.  FFS!



Faulty logic, certainly.  Bigotry, not necessarily.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> Read back, you'll see one I posed.


You will have to be more specific, I can't see one.


----------



## smokedout (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> No, but I haven't said I would accept the exclusion of trans women - quite the opposite!  The point I was making is that such a position isn't necessarily motivated by bigotry.



in practice I'd guess most transphobia in hostels/refuges amongst residents is generally driven by bigotry rather than a radical feminist analysis of socialised gender roles, but how do you tell the difference, how do you even know yourself whether you are just intellectualising your prejudices


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Yes, but we are talking here about 'women's groups', not 'black women's groups', 'lesbian women's groups' etc.  You are coming up with a reason to choose trans women as the 1 group you would exclude (or at least excuse the exclusion of) from a women's group.



I'm not coming up with it!  I'm explaining the argument that some groups use.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

> I guess they argue the practicalities; by opening the group to anyone who identifies as a woman (which is what you'd have to do to properly welcome trans women), you're offering far more opportunity to men to infiltrate_._


_

If I believe everyone who purports to be an anti-racist I run the risk of experiencing racism. _

However if I don't, experience tells me that I will experience racism anyway.


----------



## Mation (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I don't personally conceptualise gender as binary. That's not too say that I don't identify as binary.


Forgive me (not just you) if I sound like an arse, I don't mean to, but (inevitably)...

Would polar be a 'better/less confusing for people who are coming to this new/relatively untroubled' description than binary? 

Polar suggests that even if you identify as being at the unambiguosly female or unambiguously male end of the spectrum, that you do recognise that there's a spectrum. In my head, the term binary sounds like there's no spectrum (despite the fact that people who identify as binary may be perfectly fine with acknowledging a spectrum).

AuntiStella ? Apologies if this is an already done to death idea!


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> Are they bigots?


I've already answered that!


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I guess they argue the practicalities; by opening the group to anyone who identifies as a woman (which is what you'd have to do to properly welcome trans women), you're offering far more opportunity to men to infiltrate.


But here we go again! Why do you have to 'open the group up' in this way to allow trans women in?  If it's simply a 'women's group', would that not allow trans women to attend?  There's no need to open anything up, no Pandora's box to open.


----------



## campanula (May 26, 2015)

In practice, I think the admittance of transwomen could be an issue if a transperson was pre-op, still had male genitalia or dressed and acted as male. Because, to the people they interacted with, they would be male.... Identification is a negotiation, not a given...and we require validation and acceptance from outside ourselves because we are social animals There is no hierarchical preference between women and transwomen but power relations between men and women are not equal...and appearing male, to all intents and purposes carries more weight than what is under one's shirt and within one's brain, in such highly charged situations as a refuge.

Having worked in one, there has always been some power to remove or segregate - to maintain a level of safety and security within the wider group, disruptive or violent women have been excluded...and I would expect any powers to refuse admittance would be predicated on behaviour, aggression, dominance or other disruptive attitudes. I recall some painful and searching problems relating to the age of boys who could be admitted with their mother - some refuges had a very restrictive limit of 12/13 years while others maintained a more liberal ruling, allowing boys to stay with mother's until 16 or 18 years...and again, in practice, these situations were rarely amenable to dogmatic rules and regulations but had to be considered on a more case by case basis. I believe this would certainly be the case with transwomen.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Wilf said:


> But here we go again! Why do you have to 'open the group up' in this way to allow trans women in?  If it's simply a 'women's group', would that not allow trans women to attend?  There's no need to open anything up, no Pandora's box to open.



In the example I gave, it was an existing group of cis women.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 26, 2015)

campanula said:


> In practice, I think the admittance of transwomen could be an issue if a transperson was pre-op, still had male genitalia or dressed and acted as male. Because, to the people they interacted with, they would be male.... Identification is a negotiation, not a given...and we require validation and acceptance from outside ourselves because we are social animals There is no hierarchical preference between women and transwomen but power relations between men and women are not equal...and appearing male, to all intents and purposes carries more weight than what is under one's shirt and within one's brain, in such highly charged situations as a refuge.
> 
> Having worked in one, there has always been some power to remove or segregate - to maintain a level of safety and security within the wider group, disruptive or violent women have been excluded.



Sorry, but wtf is this shit?  So now we want trans women to prove they've had the op before we'll let them access refuge?  Are you having  fucking laugh?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> In the example I gave, it was an existing group of cis women.


I really don't see what your point is here.


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I guess they argue the practicalities; by opening the group to anyone who identifies as a woman (which is what you'd have to do to properly welcome trans women), you're offering far more opportunity to men to infiltrate.


 What is this 'infiltration'?  What do you actually mean, an abuser in women's clothes?  What's being breached for you, security or some not completely obvious principle?


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> _
> If I believe everyone who purports to be an anti-racist I run the risk of experiencing racism. _
> 
> However if I don't, experience tells me that I will experience racism anyway.



And you are quite free to make the choices you want.  What I wouldn't like to see is someone ascribing a dodgy motive to that choice where that wasn't necessarily the case.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

purenarcotic said:


> Sorry, but wtf is this shit?  So now we want trans women to prove they've had the op before we'll let them access refuge?  Are you having  fucking laugh?


The genital test on all abused women seeking refuge.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> The genital test on all abused women seeking refuge.



This thread is becoming more ridiculous by the minute, innit.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

If anyone wants to know why Young People Today take the piss out of old school "marxist dudes", by the way, this thread is a great example.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Wilf said:


> What is this 'infiltration'?  What do you actually mean, an abuser in women's clothes?  What's being breached for you, security or some not completely obvious principle?



As I keep saying, it's not for me - I'm explaining the motives of some exclusionary groups, despite I've said more than once that I'm pro-inclusion.  And the only reason I'm doing that is because I think the debate suffers when any woman who doesn't accept a particular diktat as to how she should define her own gender is dismissed as a bigot.  But, as far as I can tell, the argument is that men i.e. potential abusers will be able to enter the groups, get access to vulnerable women, disrupt their work etc.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> As I keep saying, it's not for me - I'm explaining the motives of some exclusionary groups, despite I've said more than once that I'm pro-inclusion.  And the only reason I'm doing that is because I think the debate suffers when any woman who doesn't accept a particular diktat as to how she should define her own gender is dismissed as a bigot.  But, as far as I can tell, the argument is that men i.e. potential abusers will be able to enter the groups, get access to vulnerable women, disrupt their work etc.


Who has suggested that women shouldn't define their own gender?


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I really don't see what your point is here.



The point is that, in the example I gave, a group of abused women had organised for mutual support, but would be dismissed as bigots for refusing to offer entry to trans women, even where that decision wasn't informed by bigotry, but by their assessment of the risks of adopting that policy for the existing members.


----------



## campanula (May 26, 2015)

Because if one of the objects of your oppression was a penis I can see why it might be preferable not to come across one in a place of safety. Often a small shared residence where privacy is not on the cards.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Who has suggested that women shouldn't define their own gender?



There's the suggestion that where, for the purposes of women-only spaces, some women define womanhood in a way the excludes trans women, they are bigots.  Women being told how they should and should not define womanhood.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> The point is that, in the example I gave, a group of abused women had organised for mutual support, but would be dismissed as bigots for refusing to offer entry to trans women, even where that decision wasn't informed  They'by bigotry, but by their assessment of the risks of adopting that policy for the existing members.


I'm tired of the sort of half-arsed justification for bigotry that you are promoting. People can come up with all sorts of justifications. Nobody ever believably says anything like what you are suggesting.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> There's the suggestion that where, for the purposes of women-only spaces, some women define womanhood in a way the excludes trans women they are bigots.  Their being told how they should and should define womanhood.


Some women exclude women without a reproductive system or with polycystic ovaries - how would they check?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> If anyone wants to know why Young People Today take the piss out of old school "marxist dudes", by the way, this thread is a great example.



I personally only frown at the ones that claim to be holier-than-thou but default to the very same hierarchy setting, preaching, but at the same time as building mirror image empires of 'know your place'...almost as is internalised prejudice isn't a real thing and they have read so many important books they are above that crucial work.

Speaking as a young person, but not as young as I used to be.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 26, 2015)

campanula said:


> Because if one of the objects of your oppression was a penis I can see why it might be preferable not to come across one in a place of safety. Often a small shared residence where privacy is not on the cards.



Probably more of an argument for those refuges that are not already self contained flats to become that over dormitory based accommodation than an argument for women only being women if they have an obvious vagina.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I'm tired of the sort of half-arsed justification for bigotry that you are promoting. People can come up with all sorts of justifications. Nobody ever believably says anything like what you are suggesting.



If you don't believe the women who give that as the reason for their stance, that's fine.  But to suggest I'm promoting bigotry is bollocks. How many times have I explained I'm pro-inclusion?  The idea that to even accept that there might be non-bigoted reasons for trans exclusion amounts to promoting bigotry is ridiculous.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

campanula said:


> Because if one of the objects of your oppression was a penis I can see why it might be preferable not to come across one in a place of safety. Often a small shared residence where privacy is not on the cards.



How would one come across it? Unless one was being shown it in some way.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Some women exclude women without a reproductive system or with polycystic ovaries - how would they check?



You seem to think I'm arguing for a system of checks, despite me repeatedly saying that I'm pro-inclusion.  My point was that there can be trans-exclusionary positions that are not motivated by bigotry.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

purenarcotic said:


> Probably more of an argument for those refuges that are not already self contained flats to become that over dormitory based accommodation than an argument for women only being women if they have an obvious vagina.



Obvious vagina.  Do I have one?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> How would one come across it? Unless one was being shown it in some way.


Or being subjected to the genital check.


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> As I keep saying, it's not for me - I'm explaining the motives of some exclusionary groups, despite I've said more than once that I'm pro-inclusion.  And the only reason I'm doing that is because I think the debate suffers when any woman who doesn't accept a particular diktat as to how she should define her own gender is dismissed as a bigot.  But, as far as I can tell, the argument is that men i.e. potential abusers will be able to enter the groups, get access to vulnerable women, disrupt their work etc.


Well, okay, let's go with your logic. Our imaginary women's group holds it's inaugural meeting, only to find a number of trans women are present. Item 1 on the first agenda is to decide if there are any women who should be excluded. Would those trans women be allowed to vote on that?


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> You seem to think I'm arguing for a system of checks, despite me repeatedly saying that I'm pro-inclusion.  My point was that there can be trans-exclusionary positions that are not motivated by bigotry.


I'm not suggesting you're asking for a series of checks - I'm suggesting that you haven't thought through how this exclusion plays out when deciding it's not bigotry.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> You seem to think I'm arguing for a system of checks, despite me repeatedly saying that I'm pro-inclusion.  My point was that there can be trans-exclusionary positions that are not motivated by bigotry.



But you haven't made this point sufficiently without imagining things that I have never heard anyone actually say. 

You talk about bigotry/prejudice as an all encompasing thing... like it is a fixed/universal that permeats all that someone is... That is not my experience.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Well, okay, let's go with your logic. Our imaginary women's group holds it's inaugural meeting, only to find a number of trans women are present. Item 1 on the first agenda is to decide if there are any women who should be excluded. Would those trans women be allowed to vote on that?



I don't know.  As I said at the beginning, it's not my place, as a man, to tell these women how to organise.  Would you?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I don't know.  As I said at the beginning, it's not my place, as a man, to tell these women how to organise.  Would you?


So stop. Just stop.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> I'm not suggesting you're asking for a series of checks - I'm suggesting that you haven't thought through how this exclusion plays out when deciding it's not bigotry.



I explicitly recognised that it may be discriminatory.  But that's different to being motivated by bigotry.


----------



## campanula (May 26, 2015)

Yes, well I was responding to a very specific situation from a position of having both used and worked in a women's refuge myself and thought I had made myself quite clear that all these sort of decisions, debates and attitudes are never fixed and unchanging but dynamic and contingent - it behooves us all to look beyond restricting definitions, especially regarding power relations.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> So stop. Just stop.


No.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> No.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I explicitly recognised that it may be discriminatory.  But that's different to being motivated by bigotry.


Accidentallied an exclusion?


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> But you haven't made this point sufficiently without imagining things that I have never heard anyone actually say.
> 
> You talk about bigotry/prejudice as an all encompasing thing... like it is a fixed/universal that permeats all that someone is... That is not my experience.



I don't accept that the idea that some trans-exclusion might not be motivated by bigotry is predicated upon a monolithic idea of what prejudice is.  Happy to agree to disagree.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Accidentallied an exclusion?



No, deliberately, but motivated by something other than bigotry.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> No, deliberately, but motivated by something other than bigotry.


Deliberate exclusion motivated by what?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

Jesus. MAYBE THEY WEREN'T BIGOTS BUT JUST MISUNDERSTOOD OR SOMETHING FFS


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I don't know.  As I said at the beginning, it's not my place, as a man, to tell these women how to organise.  Would you?


No, I wouldn't tell them, but I'd have an opinion on it - that it would be discriminatory and lacking in basic solidarity.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> Deliberate exclusion motivated by what?



A desire to protect the existing group (abused cis women in my example) from the increased risk of male infiltration that would be a corollary of allowing membership to anyone who purported to identify as a woman.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

*lobs dictionary at Athos's head*


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> A desire to protect the existing group (abused cis women in my example) from the increased risk of male infiltration that would be a corollary of allowing membership to anyone who purported to identify as a woman.


And in so doing abuses all women seeking refuge there - wtf is the risk management in that?


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Wilf said:


> No, I wouldn't tell them, but I'd have an opinion on it - that it would be discriminatory and lacking in basic solidarity.



I think I'd agree with you that it would be discriminatory and lacking solidarity (which is why I'm pro-inclusion).  But it doesn't follow that I would believe that the decision was necessarily motivated by bigotry.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I don't accept that the idea that some trans-exclusion might not be motivated by bigotry is predicated upon a monolithic idea of what prejudice is.  Happy to agree to disagree.




IME prejudice and bigotry are things/terms that explain a state/decision/perspective that may be temporal and specific, yet upon examination is the culmination of very complex reasoning, much of which is internalised unconciously. There is no monolith in that sense...yet the experience for those on the receiving end of the resulting dismission/oppression/exclusion etc, it transpires is pretty much the same in terms of how it pigeon holes/abuses/isolates/undermines/excludes. Imagine that?

I too am happy to disagree. That's what I am doing, happily.


----------



## TopCat (May 26, 2015)

the button said:


>


I think this correctly identified model has been the modus operandi of the re named Special Demonstration Squad for quite a long time.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> And in so doing abuses all women seeking refuge there - wtf is the risk management in that?



It's not for me to dictate to these women how to weight risk.  My point is that their decision is not necessarily motivated by bigotry.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 26, 2015)

I don't think you have Julie Bindelled quite enough here. Perhaps you'd like to a bit more and then we could have done with it.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> IME prejudice and bigotry are things/terms that explain a state/decision/perspective that may be temporal and specific, yet upon examination is the culmination of very complex reasoning, much of which is internalised unconciously. There is no monolith in that sense...yet the experience for those on the receiving end of the resulting dismission/oppression/exclusion etc, it transpires is pretty much the same in terms of how it pigeon holes/abuses/isolates/undermines/excludes. Imagine that?
> 
> I too am happy to disagree. That's what I am doing, happily.



I agree with you that the effects on those on the receiving end are equally discriminatory, regardless of whether the motivation is bigotry.  We disagree on the motivation issue.


----------



## Wilf (May 26, 2015)

Oh do fuck off with the 'infiltation' line!  Infiltration, is an act of deception over identity to hurt, gain information etc.  However, earlier you said that trans women need the principle of 'self identification' in order to be admitted and that would allow abusive blokes to claim the same principle allowed them in. That 'claiming' would, by definition, be a public thing - and so quite the _opposite_ of infiltration.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I agree with you that the effects on those on the receiving end are equally discriminatory, regardless of whether the motivation is bigotry.  We disagree on the motivation issue.



I haven't directly commented on the motivation issue because I don't think it's possible to define someone's motivation so easily...I am fully aware that much of how we define ourselves and the world/others around us is internalised unconciously...that's why i said there is no monolith...although now I write that I get the feeling it's very much to do with 'feeling' or wanting to be 'different' to the object of one's prejudice. That doesn't make our prejudice or exclusion universally right though.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Oh do fuck off with the 'infiltation' line!  Infiltration, is an act of deception over identity to hurt, gain information etc.  However, earlier you said that trans women need the principle of 'self identification' in order to be admitted and that would allow abusive blokes to claim the same principle allowed them in. That's 'claiming' would, by definition, be a public thing - and so quite the _opposite_ of infiltration.



OK, substitute 'enter' for 'infiltrate'.  The point remains the same.  Some women fear that men would enter the group by posing as people who self-identify as women if the rules of entry were extended to allow entry to anyone who self-identifies as a woman.  An argument I find unpersuasive, but, nonetheless, one that can't simply be dismissed as bigotry.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> one that can't simply be dismissed as bigotry.



We are now on page 68. No one has suggested it's* simply* bigotry IMO. Quite the opposite..hence the extended discussion and unpicking of terminology.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I haven't directly commented on the motivation issue because I don't think it's possible to define someone's motivation so easily...I am fully aware that much of how we define ourselves and the world/others around us is internalised unconciously...that's why i said there is no monolith...although now I write that I get the feeling it's very much to do with 'feeling' or wanting to be 'different' to the object of one's prejudice. That doesn't make our prejudice or exclusion universally right though.



Agreed.  Nobody is arguing that prejudice or exclusion is universally right.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> We are now on page 68. No one has suggested it's* simply* bigotry IMO. Quite the opposite..hence the extended discussion and unpicking of terminology.



It seems to me that, for some on this thread, it is that binary - that every trans-exclusionary position is necessarily motivated by bigotry.  Which has, to some extent, harmed the discussion IMO.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

If someone abuses me I don't much care if their motivation is love or hate.


----------



## Sea Star (May 26, 2015)

Mation said:


> Forgive me (not just you) if I sound like an arse, I don't mean to, but (inevitably)...
> 
> Would polar be a 'better/less confusing for people who are coming to this new/relatively untroubled' description than binary?
> 
> ...


Discussions that ive had with people who identify as non binary is that some gender identities dont see themselves as male or female or any combination therof and therefore off the spectrum entirely. I put forward the idea of a 3 dimensional spectrum and they agreed that that just might work. 
Its difficult for me to conceptualise such thing tbh as i can only understand a spectrum.


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> If someone abuses me I don't much care if their motivation is love or hate.



I accept that.  But the question you and I first engaged one another on was specifically about motivation of trans-exclusionary positions.  When I said (in post #1894):

Are you suggesting it's impossible that there could be any motivation for excluding trans women from women-only spaces other than bigotry? What about the purely practical argument that it's the best way to ensure that men are kept out, since to allow anyone who purports to identify as a woman could easily be exploited by a cis man seeking to infiltrate? Personally, I think that's a highly unlikely eventuality, but these women's assessment of risks/priorities might be different from mine - informed by their own experiences, but not based on bigotry.


----------



## TopCat (May 26, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Look at Jimmy Savile.


Oh fucking hell did you just really bring Jimmy into this? There should be a internet LAW about that.


----------



## cesare (May 26, 2015)

Athos said:


> I accept that.  But the question you and I first engaged one another on was specifically about motivation of trans-exclusionary positions.


You engaged me, after Citizen66 engaged me, after kabbes engaged me. Not sure what order. But clearly your position is based on motivation only and mine is based on effect + bewilderment that someone would find it OK to abuse me as long as they were motivated by something other than bigotry.


----------



## TopCat (May 26, 2015)

I think this has all become rather upsetting (to me) and a ridiculous tangent of horrid. People can self identify regarding gender. We should respect this. How is it an issue except for bigots?

I'm putting all of you fuckers on ignore. The whole lot of you, including Mation. Plus Banmagnet. Plus my mum. And BobbyCat


----------



## Athos (May 26, 2015)

cesare said:


> You engaged me, after Citizen66 engaged me, after kabbes engaged me. Not sure what order. But clearly your position is based on motivation only and mine is based on effect + bewilderment that someone would find it OK to abuse me as long as they were motivated by something other than bigotry.



I certainly don't think it's ok for anyone to abuse anyone else, regardless of motivation (which is why I repeatedly explained I am pro-inclusion).  But you're right that my point was limited to a consideration of the motivation behind exclusionary positions, and the negative effect on the debate that follows from simply writing off every such position as being motivated by bigotry - it precludes any real need to engage with it on a meaningful level.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Athos said:


> I certainly don't think it's ok for anyone to abuse anyone else, regardless of motivation (which is why I repeatedly explained I am pro-inclusion).  But you're right that my point was limited to a consideration of the motivation behind such positions, and the negative effect on the debate that follows from simply writing off every exclusionary position as being motivated by bigotry - it precludes any real need to engage with it on a meaningful level.


All credit to you for being so tenacious in ensuring that there's a safe space for people to abuse people motivated by something other than bigotry.


----------



## Athos (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> All credit to you for being so tenacious in ensuring that there's a safe space for people to abuse people motivated by something other than bigotry.



That's a cheap shot.  I've never argued for anyone to be given a platform for abuse; merely for  an environment which allows for serious engagement with the arguments (which are important to feminism), rather than shutting people - especially other women - down by shouting 'bigot' at them.  Almost as if this was a politics discussion forum.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Athos said:


> That's a cheap shot.  I've never argued for anyone to be given a platform for abuse; merely for  an environment which allows for serious engagement with the arguments (important to feminism), rather than shutting people down by shouting 'bigot' at them.  Almost as if this was a politics discussion forum.


Well you've certainly changed my mind. I'll describe them by their effects in future. And it's only important to one type of feminism and a type that many many feminists have distanced themselves from.


----------



## Athos (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> Well you've certainly changed my mind. I'll describe them by their effects in future. And it's only important to one type of feminism and a type that many many feminists have distanced themselves from.



Cool.  When you engage with people about the - possibly unintended - consequences of their actions, you're far more likely to persuade them to change their position than by  - possibly wrongly - accusing them of being motivated by something sinister.

I find it hard to see how the different strands of feminist thought operate in silo.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Athos said:


> Cool.  When you engage with people about the - possibly unintended - consequences of their actions, you're far more likely to persuade them to change their position than by  - possibly wrongly - accusing them of being motivated by something sinister.
> 
> I find it hard to see how the different strands of feminist thought operate in silo.


I'll be sure to be kind to abusers not motivated by bigotry and give them as much benefit of the doubt as possible about the unintended consequences of their actions - will that do?


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Gonna go and hug casually red now


----------



## Athos (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> I'll be sure to be kind to abusers not motivated by bigotry and give them as much benefit of the doubt as possible about the unintended consequences of their actions - will that do?



I think engaging positively with people whose actions are not motivated by malice but which actions have negative consequences (e.g. abused women who try to create safe spaces for themselves , but discriminate against trans women in the process) is more likely to result in a favourable outcome, yes.


----------



## Wilf (May 27, 2015)

Athos said:


> Cool.  When you engage with people about the - possibly unintended - consequences of their actions, you're far more likely to persuade them to change their position than by  - possibly wrongly - accusing them of being motivated by something sinister.
> 
> I find it hard to see how the different strands of feminist thought operate in silo.


Rutita said:


> We are now on page 68. No one has suggested it's* simply* bigotry IMO. Quite the opposite..hence the extended discussion and unpicking of terminology.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Athos said:


> I think engaging positively with people whose actions have negative consequences but are not motivated by malice  (e.g. women who discriminate against trans women as result of the abuse they themselves have suffered) is more likely to result in a favourable outcome, yes.


Thanks for explaining how that works.


----------



## Athos (May 27, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Rutita said:



I know; I answered her.


----------



## Casually Red (May 27, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> why? i'm not sure what the answer is. if there is an answer. what is a white person? what is a brown person? what is a black person? are you brave enough to state clearly which is which?



She's a fucking dickhead is what she is .


----------



## Wilf (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> Gonna go and hug casually red now


Well, nows yer chance.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Well, nows yer chance.


I want to see Athos hug him first and explain to him the (unintended) error of his ways.


----------



## Athos (May 27, 2015)

I'll pass.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Athos said:


> I'll pass.


Harder target than me, eh.


----------



## Casually Red (May 27, 2015)

Athos said:


> A desire to protect the existing group (abused cis women in my example) from the increased risk of male infiltration that would be a corollary of allowing membership to anyone who purported to identify as a woman.



What if the infiltrators were 2 midgets , one male , one female , in a big coat pretending to be one tall person ? They'd pass a genital check .

You can't be too careful .


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> What if the infiltrators were 2 midgets , one male , one female , in a big coat pretending to be one tall person ? They'd pass a genital check .
> 
> You can't be too careful .


----------



## Athos (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> Harder target than me, eh.



Eh?  I've not 'targeted' you, have I?  Apart from anything else, I've no reason to; as far as I know, this is the first exchange we've had.  We just disagreed that's all, from my perspective.  Certainly didn't set out to have a pop at you, and don't think I was rude or aggressive.


----------



## Athos (May 27, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> What if the infiltrators were 2 midgets , one male , one female , in a big coat pretending to be one tall person ? They'd pass a genital check .
> 
> You can't be too careful .


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Athos said:


> Eh?  I've not 'targeted' you, have I?  Apart from anything else, I've no reason to; as far as I know, this is the first exchange we've had.  We just disagreed that's all, from y perspective.  Certainly didn't set out to have a pop at you, and don;t think I was rude or aggressive.


Unintended consequences but ((((( Athos ))))  x x x


----------



## Athos (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> Unintended consequences but ((((( Athos ))))  x x x



Sorry.  

Should have stuck with my resolution to give contentious and emotive topics a swerve.


----------



## Wilf (May 27, 2015)

Athos said:


> Sorry.
> 
> Should have stuck with my resolution to give contentious and emotive topics a swerve.


You get back in the coat - and keep the buttons fastened!


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Athos said:


> Sorry.
> 
> Should have stuck with my resolution to give contentious and emotive topics a swerve.


Aw (((Athos))) x x x


----------



## Casually Red (May 27, 2015)

Actually it'd take 3 midgets to be convincing , the bits would be too low down .


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> Actually it'd take 3 midgets to be convincing , the bits would be too low down .


You have a problem here with the effect of three short people affected by dwarfism not passing the combined height test.


----------



## Athos (May 27, 2015)

I don't think they're called that any more.


----------



## Casually Red (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> You have a problem here with the effect of three midgets not passing the combined height test.



Platform shoes , no probs .


----------



## Wilf (May 27, 2015)

Just to take a different tack on this: in the example of a women's group or a refuge, would the women have the right to be concerned about the presence  of men?  Would they be entitled to exclude men? YES, of course!  It's just that the presence of trans women has nothing to do with that situation.

Oh and while I'm in random mode, if anyone wants to _really_ be outraged over this, google Germaine Greer's views on trans women (which she was repeating at the Oxford or Cambridge Union recently).


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> Platform shoes , no probs .


Too tall for the man test?


----------



## Wilf (May 27, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> Actually it'd take 3 midgets to be convincing , the bits would be too low down .


I think we should take heed of Urban's Equalities Officer on this.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Just to take a different tack on this: in the example of a women's group or a refuge, would the women have the right to be concerned about the presence  of men?  Would they be entitled to exclude men? YES, of course!  It's just that the presence of trans women has nothing to do with that situation.
> 
> Oh and while I'm in random mode, if anyone wants to _really_ be outraged over this, google Germaine Greer's views on trans women (which she was repeating at the Oxford or Cambridge Union recently).


Blimey, Greer's mellowed on this compared to back in the day.


----------



## newbie (May 27, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Who knows? The question has been asked repeatedly but no answers/experiences have emerged.


you asked this before and I answered sport, but no-one picked up on it.  It seems to me to be the area which is by far the most likely to generate legitimate issues which cannot be dismissed as bigotry

Since then AS has posted something which linked to the rather odd circumstances of Allison Woolbert, which I'd not heard of before and don't pretend to know anything about, but does seem relevant to your question.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> Platform shoes , no probs .


stilts ftw


----------



## Mation (May 27, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Discussions that ive had with people who identify as non binary is that some gender identities dont see themselves as male or female or any combination therof and therefore off the spectrum entirely. I put forward the idea of a 3 dimensional spectrum and they agreed that that just might work.
> Its difficult for me to conceptualise such thing tbh as i can only understand a spectrum.


Ah, ok - that makes sense


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 27, 2015)

newbie said:


> you asked this before and I answered sport, but no-one picked up on it.  It seems to me to be the area which is by far the most likely to generate legitimate issues which cannot be dismissed as bigotry


 I did see this. The 'legitimate' issues and 'risks being those 'unfair' advantage against other teams? There isn't a suggestion of 'risk' to other women though...that's what I was asking about tbh.



> Those unable to prove they are female would be barred from taking part in the women's leagues until they underwent medical treatment, he said.
> 
> "If these people can solve their problems through surgery and be in a position to receive the necessary medical qualifications, they will then be able to participate in [women's] football,"



'necessary medical qualifications' ... I'd like to know what that means.



> Since then AS has posted something which linked to the rather odd circumstances of Allison Woolbert, which I'd not heard of before and don't pretend to know anything about, but does seem relevant to your question.



Right, so this is what the fear is? That trans* women will sexually assault cis women?

Does the fact this one person commited a sexual assault 23 years ago give us the necessary evidence to exclude trans* women because they are all a threat to cis women?


----------



## kabbes (May 27, 2015)

Three dimensions creates eight "extreme" genders plus a continuum of intermediary positions.  But why stop there?  Why not five or ten dimensions, for 32 or 1024 distinct genders?  Is it that hard to think of 5 distinct human traits that are unrelated to eachother? Even some of the crappy psychometric test bollocks that's out there have 11 dimensions.


----------



## J Ed (May 27, 2015)

BTW for those who are making the bathroom argument - a transwoman in Sheffield was sacked by an agency at Aviva in Sheffield for using the female toilet. After some pickets by the IWW, Aviva, which as far as I could tell was horrified by what happened from the start, ended up getting rid of the agency and employing the transwoman directly.

So... TERF feminists are not only more backwards on this issue than the British Army but also a significant part of the financial industry. What is the point of you?


----------



## J Ed (May 27, 2015)

BTW, yesterday in a bus stop (??) in Sheffield last night I saw a poster for a Julie Bindel talk during which she would apparently whine about being 'no platformed'. £5 on the door. This weird world just keeps getting weirder.


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

Julie Bindel who started a discussion about LGB rights on Guardian CiF but kept deleting all the contributions by trans women. No platformed eh?


----------



## likesfish (May 27, 2015)

More backwards than the british army is not really a sentence that comes up very frequently


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

likesfish said:


> More backwards than the british army is not really a sentence that comes up very frequently


it's not a sentence at all. no verb.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

People may recognise most of this from yesterday. Saves getting anymore of it piecemeal today: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-terf#disqus_thread


----------



## Citizen66 (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> People may recognise most of this from yesterday. Saves getting anymore of it piecemeal today: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-terf#disqus_thread



That was part of my two hour crash course.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> That was part of my two hour crash course.


Shove your cut and pasted McCarthyism up your arse "comrade"


----------



## Citizen66 (May 27, 2015)

Charming.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> That was part of my two hour crash course.


yeh your car crash course from the looks of it


----------



## Citizen66 (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh your car crash course from the looks of it



Fair enough. I learnt quite a lot from it anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Fair enough. I learnt quite a lot from it anyway.


if not windbaggery then airbaggery


----------



## two sheds (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not a sentence at all. no verb.



is


----------



## Citizen66 (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> if not windbaggery then airbaggery



Carpet baggery sans the profit.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> People may recognise most of this from yesterday. Saves getting anymore of it piecemeal today: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-terf#disqus_thread




_Terry Macdonald is a pseudonym. _


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

two sheds said:


> is


he was saying "more backwards than the british army" is a sentence. you're not up to mixing it with the big pedants, two sheds, back to the little pedants' sandpit with you.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> _Terry Macdonald is a pseudonym. _


Kind of blows a hole in the water of the alleged no platforming when the NS publish it with no right of reply. Next, the Westboro Baptist Church publish a NS piece on the perils of no platforming Christianity.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> he was saying "more backwards than the british army" is a sentence. you're not up to mixing it with the big pedants, two sheds, back to the little pedants' sandpit with you.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 27, 2015)

Less progressive would have been better. We could have an argument about state education and class if we want.


----------



## Red Cat (May 27, 2015)

The other day I was talking about the definition cis, my sense of discomfort with it (not so strong that I objected to using it) in relation to my own gender identity. I wasn't talking about anyone else's. After having read a post that appeared to be aimed at me I did pose a question about internal conflict with regards binary gender that then included the identity of others. I thoughtlessly used the word confusion, by which I didn't mean not knowing ones own mind, but the state of two opposite things in one, which I use in my work, and I think it was the wrong word to use as I did. I tried to explain it better but I didn't make a very good job of that either. I don't think it's helpful in any way to try again.

I am not trans-exclusionary. It hadn't occurred to me to think that trans* women are supporting an oppressive patriarchal structure by identifying as a woman. I hadn't heard that argument, I wasn't aware of terf politics, although I am aware terf is mentioned on here a fair bit on threads I don't usually post on (I am a bit averse to reading about stuff that takes place elsewhere on the internet, on twitter and facebook etc). I'm a bit more aware of this now and I can see how my ponderings (because I was never expressing a strongly held view) could be seen, by applying to them a logical extension, to fit in with this politics.

I think the main thing that I wasn't sensitive to (slow hand clap) was that there is a huge difference between a sense of conflict with the dominant idea of binary gender and femininity and an experience in which what you feel about who you are is in conflict with how others see you, and that the word cis refers to this, to our relationship with others and how we are seen by others, rather than whether we conform internally or externally to prescribed gender roles. I don't think I really got that.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Less progressive would have been better. We could have an argument about state education and class if we want.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

FWIW Red Cat, there's only one person naming you, and who's done it twice and it's not me. I never even imagined you'd be trans-exclusionary, I just thought you'd had a misunderstanding with AS which you'd quite quickly clarified.


----------



## two sheds (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> he was saying "more backwards than the british army" is a sentence. you're not up to mixing it with the big pedants, two sheds, back to the little pedants' sandpit with you.



curses 

You're only a little pedant, too, though. _Proper _big pedants who criticize other peoples' grammar start their sentences with a capital letter.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

two sheds said:


> curses
> 
> You're only a little pedant, too, though. _Proper _big pedants who criticize other peoples' grammar start their sentences with a capital letter.


i always knew that at heart you were a capitalist


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

There have been trans exclusionary arguments on here but I don't think anyone on this thread has been out and out trans exclusionary. But people fall into these arguments by not having seen or understood the whole picture. I think I was more upset that my attempts to warn people about where these arguments were leading fell mostly on deaf ears. And that my experience as someone who has been on the receiving end of TE abuse for about 8 months was apparently worthless.

That said a lot of good stuff has been posted on here since then and it's clear to me that trans people have more allies than enemies now.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

two sheds said:


> You're only a little pedant, too, though. _Proper _big pedants who criticize other peoples' grammar start their sentences with a capital letter.


hypocritical too:





> curses


----------



## Citizen66 (May 27, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> There have been trans exclusionary arguments on here but I don't think anyone on this thread has been out and out trans exclusionary. But people fall into these arguments by not having seen or understood the whole picture. I think I was more upset that my attempts to warn people about where these arguments were leading fell mostly on deaf ears. And that my experience as someone who has been on the receiving end of TE abuse for about 8 months was apparently worthless.



I'm sorry if I contributed towards that. I've learned a lot and feel a bit sheepish today tbh. I'm not trans exclusionary and I've now swung towards the suggestion that those that are perhaps are motivated by bigotry.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm sorry if I contributed towards that. I've learned a lot and feel a bit sheepish today tbh. I'm not trans exclusionary and I've now swung towards the suggestion that those that are perhaps are motivated by bigotry.


it's not, i think, merely a suggestion


----------



## Citizen66 (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not, i think, merely a suggestion



Assertion, whatever.


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

I think I've taken everyone off ignore now. Sorry, I have to be really careful about how I deal with this stuff.


----------



## two sheds (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> hypocritical too:



Wrong, I didn't claim to be a big or proper pedant. Indeed, I acknowledged my second-tier pedantry in the very post you quoted. 

Your compulsion to have the last word in every argument now shows you up to be only a third-rate pedant, though.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Fingers said:


> 100 pages +


top trolling imo


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

two sheds said:


> Wrong, I didn't claim to be a big or proper pedant. Indeed, I acknowledged my second-tier pedantry in the very post you quoted.
> 
> Your compulsion to have the last word in every argument now shows you up to be only a third-rate pedant, though.


yeh, i know, back in the day i was up there - the jimmy white of the pedant world - but now the youngsters have caught up to and indeed surpassed any pedantry i could hope to display.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh, i know, back in the day i was up there - the jimmy white of the pedant world - but now the youngsters have caught up to and indeed surpassed any pedantry i could hope to display.


We can only be thankful that the intersectionalista kids have come *nowhere* near the type of batshit identity politics that the worst of the TERFS are at.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> We can only be thankful that the intersectionalista kids have come *nowhere* near the type of batshit identity politics that the worst of the TERFS are at.


yeh but i would remind you that the difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but i would remind you that the difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.


Amply demonstrated by useful idiots.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 27, 2015)

Timely post elsewhere:



> 'My sense is that we may not need the language of innateness or genetics to understand that we are all ethically bound to recognize another person’s declared or enacted sense of sex and/or gender. We do not have to agree upon the “origins” of that sense of self to agree that it is ethically obligatory to support and recognize sexed and gendered modes of being that are crucial to a person’s well-being.'



http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/2009-judith-butler-on-gender-and-the-trans-experience


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> People may recognise most of this from yesterday. Saves getting anymore of it piecemeal today: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-terf#disqus_thread


And so now they consider me to be a mcarthyite extremist for defending myself?


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

The Terfs have been so silenced by us that they seem to have free access to the media to say what they like about us with no right to reply and fully knowing the shitstorm they have created for us. I was nearly driven off twitter and out if politics by this article. You have yo look hard for my name but after it was published i was fair game for terfs and a campaign to have me deselcted began. Meanwhile i had no opportunity to say a word in my defence!
http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...d-it-was-female-only-spaces-helped-me-recover


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

.


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

.


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

.


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

.


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

.


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

.


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

.


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

.


----------



## Wilf (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> he was saying "more backwards than the british army" is a sentence. you're not up to mixing it with the big pedants, two sheds, back to the little pedants' sandpit with you.


But it's the play off season. Anyone who has underperformed all year can still get a chance of promotion.


----------



## Wilf (May 27, 2015)

two sheds said:


> curses
> 
> You're only a little pedant, too, though. _Proper _big pedants who criticize other peoples' grammar start their sentences with a capital letter.


This is a battle you cannot win.


----------



## Sea Star (May 27, 2015)

Oops poor signal and trying to do this stuff on a phone


----------



## Citizen66 (May 27, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> Oops poor signal and trying to do this stuff on a phone



I think the board might be wobbling. I've been having connection issues anyway.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> And so now they consider me to be a mcarthyite extremist for defending myself?


Exactly.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Timely post elsewhere:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/2009-judith-butler-on-gender-and-the-trans-experience


I hadn't read that interview before but the button had told me the salient points. Thanks for posting it Rutita1


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

AuntiStella said:


> The Terfs have been so silenced by us that they seem to have free access to the media to say what they like about us with no right to reply and fully knowing the shitstorm they have created for us. I was nearly driven off twitter and out if politics by this article. You have yo look hard for my name but after it was published i was fair game for terfs and a campaign to have me deselcted began. Meanwhile i had no opportunity to say a word in my defence!
> http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...d-it-was-female-only-spaces-helped-me-recover


Many of us spit every time the New Statesman is sourced. It's a rich vein for the kind of politics that get hauled over the coals in the urban v the commentariat thread in this forum.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

cesare said:


> Many of us spit every time the New Statesman is sourced. It's a rich vein for the kind of politics that get hauled over the coals in the urban v the commentariat thread in this forum.


fortunately most people who despise the ns do not spit whenever it is sourced or we would all drown.


----------



## cesare (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> fortunately most people who despise the ns do not spit whenever it is sourced or we would all drown.


Good point.


----------



## Nice one (May 27, 2015)

Mustafa keeps her job. Sanity prevails or green light for intersectional politics on campus?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...of-no-confidence-petition-fails-10277562.html


----------



## 8ball (May 27, 2015)

Nice one said:


> Mustafa keeps her job. Sanity prevails or green light for intersectional politics on campus?
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...of-no-confidence-petition-fails-10277562.html


 
I thought intersectional politics were all they did on campus.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Nice one said:


> Mustafa keeps her job. Sanity prevails or green light for intersectional politics on campus?
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...of-no-confidence-petition-fails-10277562.html


just a sign that trying to no-confidence sabbaticals is very difficult: and even if they had got 240 students to sign the petition term would be all but over before the referendum - the next stage - occurred, and so it would have been kicked into the long grass.


----------



## Batboy (May 27, 2015)

_Goldsmiths Students' Union has now said the petition has failed after only 1.9 per cent of its 8,000 members signed it. The students' union has added however that concerns raised will be addressed._

1.9% turnout.... It's nice to see politics, NSU  and voting/signing petition is widely embraced  by students in our education system 

Almost a bigger vote/interest on these boards!

Edited to satisfy nit pickers.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Batboy said:


> _Goldsmiths Students' Union has now said the petition has failed after only 1.9 per cent of its 8,000 members signed it. The students' union has added however that concerns raised will be addressed._
> 
> 1.9% turnout.... It's nice to see politics, NSU  and voting is widely embraced  by students in our education system
> 
> Almost a bigger vote on these boards!


you do know signing a petition and voting are different things?


----------



## Batboy (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you do know signing a petition and voting are different things?


yes I do... but it often amounts to a similar thing don't be a smarty pants 
You could conclude that the 98.1% who didn't bother to vote/sign petition call it what you like, because they don't give a shit, in much the same way as I don't.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Batboy said:


> yes I do... but it often amounts to a similar thing don't be a smarty pants
> You could conclude that the 98.1% who didn't bother to vote/sign petition call it what you like, because they don't give a shit, in much the same way as I don't.


what you have here is a special sort of motion to call a referendum. whereas most su motions require something like a proposer and 10 seconders this required 240 people to append their names to the motion. the motion would then have been the subject of campaigns for and against and then - and only then - would any actual voting or turning out have taken place. the 1.9% of the student population is now irrelevant as only if it had reached 3% or higher would anything have happened as a result. you may say you don't give a shit, but that's no excuse for spouting it.


----------



## Wilf (May 27, 2015)

Batboy said:


> yes I do... but it often amounts to a similar thing don't be a smarty pants
> You could conclude that the 98.1% who didn't bother to vote/sign petition call it what you like, because they don't give a shit, in much the same way as I don't.


No, not at all.  Petition calls for the erection of a Margaret Thatcher statue outside the main lecture theatre of a university. Only 1% of students sign it.  Good or bad?


----------



## Batboy (May 27, 2015)

Wilf said:


> No, not at all.  Petition calls for the erection of a Margaret Thatcher statue outside the main lecture theatre of a university. Only 1% of students vote in favour.  Good or bad?


 99% didn't give a shit.... nor do I!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Batboy said:


> 99% didn't give a shit.... nor do I!






			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> you may say you don't give a shit, but that's no excuse for spouting it.


----------



## Batboy (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> what you have here is a special sort of motion to call a referendum. whereas most su motions require something like a proposer and 10 seconders this required 240 people to append their names to the motion. the motion would then have been the subject of campaigns for and against and then - and only then - would any actual voting or turning out have taken place. the 1.9% of the student population is now irrelevant as only if it had reached 3% or higher would anything have happened as a result. you may say you don't give a shit, but that's no excuse for spouting it.



The fact that 98.1% of 8000 people couldn't be arsed to sign the petition is the more pertinent point.... far more important things in life than worrying about some silly sausage making stupid comments.


----------



## Wilf (May 27, 2015)

Batboy said:


> 99% didn't give a shit.... nor do I!


Most petitions allow you to register only support for a single position. Votes allow support for more than 1 position (or candidate).  You do get this, don't you?


----------



## Batboy (May 27, 2015)

Ambivalence is an overriding factor in most of these situations. People often say they will do things but then they don't because they can't be arsed.


----------



## Batboy (May 27, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Most petitions allow you to register only support for a single position. Votes allow support for more than 1 position (or candidate).  You do get this, don't you?



Indeed. Of course I don't I'm fucking stupid/drunk/mentally deranged/something else. I think you are missing my point.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Batboy said:


> The fact that 98.1% of 8000 people couldn't be arsed to sign the petition is the more pertinent point.... far more important things in life than worrying about some silly sausage making stupid comments.


you do like talking bollocks, don't you. you're assuming that the entire student population knew about and mostly decided not to sign this petition, which won't have been the case for a range of reasons. i think getting 165 people to sign a petition when it is obvious from the outset it is a dead letter shows there is some disquiet among the student population about b.m.'s statements. but being as it's the middle of exams, with the last exams about 2 weeks away, it would be difficult to achieve 240 signatories even if the proposal was something universally popular.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Batboy said:


> Ambivalence is an overriding factor in most of these situations. People often say they will do things but then they don't because they can't be arsed.


if only you told us you were going to continue posting and then didn't because you couldn't be arsed.


----------



## Batboy (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> if only you told us you were going to continue posting and then didn't because you couldn't be arsed.



You are an acerbic cunt PM... 

You will be pleased to know shortly I will be unable to post as I will be getting on long haul flight back to UK. That may keep you satisfied for a short while but rest assured unless the plane crashes into the Atlantic Ocean, I will come back to piss you off.... and don't go wishing my plane to crash because that's not very nice.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Batboy said:


> You are an acerbic cunt PM...
> 
> You will be pleased to know shortly I will be unable to post as I will be getting on long haul flight back to UK. That may keep you satisfied for a short while but rest assured unless the plane crashes into the Atlantic Ocean, I will come back to piss you off.... and don't go wishing my plane to crash because that's not very nice.


and also wishes have an unfortunate habit of not coming true


----------



## Batboy (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you do like talking bollocks, don't you. you're assuming that the entire student population knew about and mostly decided not to sign this petition, which won't have been the case for a range of reasons. i think getting 165 people to sign a petition when it is obvious from the outset it is a dead letter shows there is some disquiet among the student population about b.m.'s statements. but being as it's the middle of exams, with the last exams about 2 weeks away, it would be difficult to achieve 240 signatories even if the proposal was something universally popular.




From my observations and I do have a teenage son doing exams as we speak, most students including my son still make time to go out on the piss and party (As every Student should), so I see no reason why more could have signed the petition... they couldn't be arsed is the truth nothing to do with exams.


----------



## Batboy (May 27, 2015)

And I would add, if I were a student I could not have been arsed either.....

Edited to say.. personally I would rather say to her face how offensive/wrong her views are than signing some online anonymous petition.... far more powerful if people tell her what they think, it might just alter her head thoughts. The only people really getting spunked up about this is The Daily Mail et all. Perhaps the 98.1% got it right and therefore I withdraw my criticism.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Batboy said:


> I see no reason why more could have signed the petition


you wouldn't


----------



## Pickman's model (May 27, 2015)

Batboy said:


> And I would add, if I were a student I could not have been arsed either.....


for someone who can't be arsed you seem remarkably insistent to shout about your apathy.


----------



## Batboy (May 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> for someone who can't be arsed you seem remarkably insistent to shout about your apathy.



Yep the fucking irony... life is brimming with it!


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 27, 2015)

I signed the petition. I dunno if it was in favour of sacking this woman or letting her stay, and neither outcome would affect me in the slightest, but it's important to take part in these things isn't it?


----------



## Citizen66 (May 27, 2015)

Petitions are a waste of time. Can anyone point to one that worked that wasn't politically on the cards anyway?


----------



## friedaweed (May 27, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Petitions are a waste of time. Can anyone point to one that worked that wasn't politically on the cards anyway?


The justice for the 96 one wasn't a waste of time.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 27, 2015)

friedaweed said:


> The justice for the 96 one wasn't a waste of time.



Surely it was part of a wider action rather than the sole force of pressure?


----------



## friedaweed (May 27, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Surely it was part of a wider action rather than the sole force of pressure?


Of course but it wasn't a waste of time our kid


----------



## comrade spurski (May 28, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Petitions are a waste of time. Can anyone point to one that worked that wasn't politically on the cards anyway?


They can be a good way of raising awareness of an issue or a way to get an issue discussed...have used them  in work (used to work in a 13 floor council building) as talking to more than a few people while working was difficult so would petition out side during lunch with other stewards...found it useful and often raised money for strikes or campaigns do it
But agree that they don't usually change things.


----------



## Sea Star (May 28, 2015)

Athos said:


> I'm trying to promote the possibility of meaningful debate where any woman who suggests anything contrary to the prevailing view isn't dismissed as a bigot.


But it will be one that excludes trans women so it can never be a valid one. My attempts to discuss this always ends with the trans exclusionary telling me im a man and that i therefore have no voice in feminism. Thats what i call no platforming!


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 28, 2015)

Athos said:


> I'm tryi





cesare said:


> The genital test on all abused women seeking refuge.



Or, even more absurdly, a *functional* genital test.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 28, 2015)

cesare said:


> Some women exclude women without a reproductive system or with polycystic ovaries - how would they check?



An MRI scanner in every refuge!


----------



## cesare (May 28, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Or, even more absurdly, a *functional* genital test.


Aye. And psychiatrist and/or doctor's certificates but where the psychiatrist/doctor doing the certifying has to be a woman. Makes the old days of looking at fannies with hand mirrors a lot less daunting.


----------



## cesare (May 28, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> An MRI scanner in every refuge!


And on the spot chromosome testing!


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 28, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Oh fucking hell did you just really bring Jimmy into this? There should be a internet LAW about that.



TopCat's Law. Like Godwin's Law, but about nonce D.J.s.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2015)

kabbes http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...icer-facing-sack.335058/page-22#post-13906516 answer pls


----------



## Belushi (Oct 6, 2015)

Woman summonsed to court after malicious communication complaint


----------



## Sirena (Oct 6, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Woman summonsed to court after malicious communication complaint


If that's just about the 'kill all white men' tweet, then I think that's ludicrous.  

If it's about something else then I don't know.....


----------



## MrSki (Oct 6, 2015)

More details here



> The 28-year-old from Edmonton, north-east London, faces two charges, one is sending a communication conveying a threatening message between 10 November 2014 and 31 May 2015. The second is for sending a grossly offensive message via a public communication network between 10 November 2014 and 31 May 2015.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2015)

MrSki said:


> More details here


The tweets bollocks (white trash etc) was from 18th nov. So yep. That;'s what it is.

Some libertarian has complained i expect.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 6, 2015)

Surely 'threatening commuications' have to be credible and specific for there to be criminal charges involved. 'Kill all white men' is neither of those. It's not specific and it would involve killing Liam Neeson, which means it's not credible.


----------



## imposs1904 (Oct 6, 2015)

Sirena said:


> If that's just about the 'kill all white men' tweet, then I think that's ludicrous.
> 
> If it's about something else then I don't know.....



as a white male,  I felt threatened.  I was too scared to report it, though.


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 6, 2015)

She's an idiot, but this is ridiculous


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

Thank God, I've barely set foot outside the door since she made her threat!  

Utterly, utterly fucking ridiculous.


----------



## the button (Oct 6, 2015)

As a white man, I for one will sleep more soundly tonight.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

What the fuck are the CPS thinking about?  Do hope the old bill are spending as much energy in tracking down the keyboard warriors who send death/rape threats to feminists online.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 6, 2015)

When a university diversity officer can't make eyerollingly stupid generalised threats of violence without fear of legal repercussions, it's quite simply political correctness gone mad


----------



## Vintage Paw (Oct 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> What the fuck are the CPS thinking about?  Do hope the old bill are spending as much energy in tracking down the keyboard warriors who send death/rape threats to feminists online.



Exactly this. Mustafa received a boat load of rape and death threats after this story first broke, how many of them will be joining her in the dock?

Also saw the comparison to the fated Katie Hopkins. She can say all refugees should be shot in the sea, but hey, that's free speech you guise.


----------



## belboid (Oct 6, 2015)

Katie Hopkins must be shitting herself


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 6, 2015)

When are Primal Scream going to have their collars felt for instructing everyone to Kill all Hippies? 

I guess it's a stretch to label hippies as an oppressed minority. Unlike white men.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2015)

Might not be that nonsense.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> When a university diversity officer can't make eyerollingly stupid generalised threats of violence without fear of legal repercussions, it's quite simply political correctness gone mad


At least they passed the Being a Bit Silly Act 2015 to protect us from these heinous acts.


----------



## Sirena (Oct 6, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> She's an idiot, but this is ridiculous


I agree.  I think she deserved to be derided and slagged off.  I even think it wouldn't have been too harsh to sack her.

But to involved the law and the courts?  At the most, she should be cautioned.

I don't use Twitter but it must be full of killallmuslims and killallniggaz and killalleverything hashtags


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 6, 2015)

#killalleverything is fine because it's non-discriminatory.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2015)

Has it been established that this is what she's been summonsed for? This kill all white men thing?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Might not be that nonsense.


The dates quoted - Nov 14 to May 15 - suggest it is the stuff discussed on this thread (the 'white trash' tweet was Nov 14).  But yes, there might have been other stuff.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 6, 2015)

Wasn't this something she said before she was even in that role though or am I confusing it with something else?

If people can retrospectively trawl through your social media history and have you up before the beak for something you said five years ago when you were pissed then a few of us are fucked.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 6, 2015)

I see. Not that then.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 6, 2015)

I may or may not have said some choice things about the Royal Family and heads on sticks in the past. I now fear The Knock.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Has it been established that this is what she's been summonsed for? This kill all white men thing?


Not 100% clear from this:
Student officer who allegedly tweeted 'kill all white men' to face charges
but it suggests it was the stuff we've discussed.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 6, 2015)

Just sack the mad woman and be done with it. It has nothing to do with feminism and all to do with middle class postering.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 6, 2015)

Involving the establishment - that is what privileged lefties do to get their own way. Seen it all before and am sure we will see it plenty times again.


----------



## belboid (Oct 6, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Just sack the mad woman and be done with it. It has nothing to do with feminism and all to do with middle class postering.


sack someone for 'posturing'?  Wow


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 6, 2015)

belboid said:


> sack someone for 'posturing'?  Wow


Sack her for spouting rubbish, being verbally abusive and using threatening language.


----------



## belboid (Oct 6, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Sack her for spouting rubbish, being verbally abusive and using threatening language.


You think it was actually threatening?  You must be not quite as macho as the rest of your posts make out.

utterly laughable


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Just sack the mad woman and be done with it. It has nothing to do with feminism and all to do with middle class postering.


You're not in any sort of workers rep role are you?


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Just sack the mad woman and be done with it. It has nothing to do with feminism and all to do with middle class postering.



apparently the students she represents didn't agree


> An student petition calling for her to be removed from her position garnered only 165 signatures, and she was allowed by the student union to keep her job, because it failed to meet the 3% threshold to trigger a referendum that could have dislodged her.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 6, 2015)

belboid said:


> You think it was actually threatening?  You must be not quite as macho as the rest of your posts make out.
> 
> utterly laughable


As far as I am concerned she is  another one of the system produced screwed up nutjobs who just create divisiveness. good riddance to her.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 6, 2015)

Dowie said:


> I'm not sure race is a mental state or something you can chose to self identify as, granted it is rather arbitrary. I mean there are some white people on the internet who are seemingly obsessed with Japanese culture, I'm sure some of them would love to self identify as Asian... but it doesn't really work like that.



Google otakukin 
Weep for mankind


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Oct 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Not 100% clear from this:
> Student officer who allegedly tweeted 'kill all white men' to face charges
> but it suggests it was the stuff we've discussed.


We'll have to wait until the first hearing to find out - the media usually reports the entire prosecution case summary (even though it isn't technically allowed to).



Citizen66 said:


> If people can retrospectively trawl through your social media history and have you up before the beak for something you said five years ago when you were pissed then a few of us are fucked.


These are summary offences, so a time limit applies. Stop drinking now and mark the days off your calendar until you're free of liability in six months.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Oct 6, 2015)

The 'divisive' ones are always the feminists, the screechy ones, the black ones, the gay ones. Not the ones who create the power imbalances. It's interesting how that always works.


----------



## Nice one (Oct 6, 2015)

had a very quick look through the Malicious Communications Act which i'm assuming she will be appearing in court charged with. First thing is the communication has to be sent to another person, which could be argued her generalised #posts weren't directed at an individual.

If there is a case to answer the communication has to convey one of several things:
- a message which is grossly offensive (or indecent)
- a threat
- information which is false and known or believed to be false by the sender
- or sends another person a communication which is wholly or in part of an indecent or grossly offensive nature

_but only_ if the purpose is to cause distress or anxiety to the recipient (or indeed any other any other person who they intended for it to communicated to).

All a bit vague and open to all sorts of interpretation. What constitutes a threat or is grossly offensive is not defined. Plus there's nothing in the law about 'racially motivated' communications which is odd that the police should insert it in their press release.

The good thing is trying proving purpose, which can only really come from the accused.  A simple defence of "my purpose was not to cause distress or aniexty but to... [insert valid reason here]"

Frankly it does look like someone has made a formal complaint and it would have to have been the recipient of one of more of the communications she sent.


----------



## belboid (Oct 6, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> As far as I am concerned she is  another one of the system produced screwed up nutjobs who just create divisiveness. good riddance to her.


you're a bit of an incoherent mess, aren't you?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Oct 6, 2015)

I can't say prosecution for saying stupid things is the way to go. That doesn't mean she isn't a complete plonker though. Simply removing her from her position would be the correct response.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

Completely by the by, all this carry on was last academic year. Assuming she was in an elected sabbatical post, I'd have thought she would have have finished now - but the reporting seems to refer to her as a current officer.  Has she been re-elected or do they do a 2 year stint?

edit - ah, yes, she was - bottom of this:
Controversial Diversity officer Bahar Mustafa used images of women holding guns for election campaign | Eastlondonlines


----------



## Nice one (Oct 6, 2015)

equally she could have been done under s127 of communications act, going off the language in the police press release. This is even vaguer so a bit more worrying:

_A person is guilty of an offence if he—

(a) sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message... that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; _

which could pretty much amount to anything. Plus there's no intent to determine and no individual who has to be communicated to. That said they fucked up a lot on these. Seems a bit of a 'political' decision to proceed with this either way.


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 6, 2015)

Presumably there will be case law interpreting the vague statute law.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Oct 6, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Presumably there will be case law interpreting the vague statute law.



Probably not much if any. Summary offenses only end up creating bodies of case law by getting appealed by way of case stated (ie on a point of law) to the Queen's Bench or if they give rise to a Judicial Review. It's a bit more complicated than that but, the short version is that this is probably not a provision that's been tested much.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 6, 2015)

belboid said:


> Katie Hopkins must be shitting herself



There is 0% chance Hopkins will be prosecuted


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

Nice one said:


> Seems a bit of a 'political' decision to proceed with this either way.


 Hard to tell really. The Lisa McKenzie prosecution was just as unwarranted but had a clear target - trying to stop Class War and others getting bolder with street actions.  Not really sure what the target is in this case?  There might be an attack on feminism hidden in there somewhere, but the case itself is about some daft and rather formulaic tweets. A very odd thing to go after.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 6, 2015)

BTW as a white male can I say that all white men should be killed or will the CPS step in to protect me from inciting hatred against myself?


----------



## Nice one (Oct 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Hard to tell really. The Lisa McKenzie prosecution was just as unwarranted but had a clear target - trying to stop Class War and others getting bolder with street actions.  Not really sure what the target is in this case?  There might be an attack on feminism hidden in there somewhere, but the case itself is about some daft and rather formulaic tweets. A very odd thing to go after.



aye, i meant 'political' in term of someone pulling strings to ensure it got to the stage that it has. Guaranted there's something going on in the background.


----------



## belboid (Oct 6, 2015)

J Ed said:


> BTW as a white male can I say that all white men should be killed or will the CPS step in to protect me from inciting hatred against myself?


well, I wear the aforementioned 'Kill All Hippies' t-shirt from time to time, and seem to have got away with it so far


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Oct 6, 2015)

Who cares?

What has happened to her is undeniably ridiculous, unacceptable and downright malicious, but she's not one of us.


----------



## cesare (Oct 6, 2015)

dialectician said:


> Who cares?
> 
> What has happened to her is undeniably ridiculous, unacceptable and downright malicious, but she's not one of us.


If she can be stitched up like that, so can any of us.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Oct 6, 2015)

cesare said:


> If she can be stitched up like that, so can any of us.



Well, yes, that's what antifascists say, don't they? but that's not the point here. The point is that we are somehow supposed to solidarise with a reactionary who has been involved in left/far left politics and has actively propagated anti working-class politics, knowingly and consciously. fuck that.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 6, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's not specific and it would involve killing Liam Neeson, which means it's not credible.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 6, 2015)

If being a bit of a tit is a crime now I'm expecting to see a lot of arrests.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> What the fuck are the CPS thinking about?  Do hope the old bill are spending as much energy in tracking down the keyboard warriors who send death/rape threats to feminists online.


----------



## cesare (Oct 6, 2015)

dialectician said:


> Well, yes, that's what antifascists say, don't they? but that's not the point here. The point is that we are somehow supposed to solidarise with a reactionary who has been involved in left/far left politics and has actively propagated anti working-class politics, knowingly and consciously. fuck that.


Describe the anti working-class politics that you say she's actively propagated.


----------



## belboid (Oct 6, 2015)

dialectician said:


> Well, yes, that's what antifascists say, don't they? but that's not the point here. The point is that we are somehow supposed to solidarise with a reactionary who has been involved in left/far left politics and has actively propagated anti working-class politics, knowingly and consciously. fuck that.


So no solidarity with Stalinists, ever then. Even if they're unfairly prosecuted. Or with liberals. Or with, well, most people then.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 6, 2015)

cesare said:


> If she can be stitched up like that, so can any of us.



I think just about any of us could be done for plenty of things we've said on this forum.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 6, 2015)

8ball said:


> I think just about any of us could be done for plenty of things we've said on this forum.


I would relish my day in court so hard you could bottle it and use it as a burger condiment


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Oct 6, 2015)

belboid said:


> So no solidarity with Stalinists, ever then. Even if they're unfairly prosecuted. Or with liberals. Or with, well, most people then.



Don't be silly. That's not what I said. Obviously we solidarise with Stalinists and liberals fighting in their class interest. That is a given. But her whole position in the SU is an anti-working class position, a position that discounts the centrality of class, a position that advocates the reification of race and the artificial redefinition of categories like black and white.

By Bahar's logic, 30 years ago, she would have had to exclude herself from the non-white event she organised as she would have been seen as politically white by PoC activists and the politically black diaspora - whereas asians, for instance, were not.


----------



## Thimble Queen (Oct 6, 2015)

cesare said:


> Describe the anti working-class politics that you say she's actively propagated.



Yeah I'd like to know the answer to this as well dialectician 

If it's this you might have to go a bit slower for me 



dialectician said:


> Don't be silly. That's not what I said. Obviously we solidarise with Stalinists and liberals fighting in their class interest. That is a given. But her whole position in the SU is an anti-working class position, a position that discounts the centrality of class, a position that advocates the reification of race and the artificial redefinition of categories like black and white.


----------



## belboid (Oct 6, 2015)

dialectician said:


> Don't be silly. That's not what I said. Obviously we solidarise with Stalinists and liberals fighting in their class interest. That is a given. But her whole position in the SU is an anti-working class position, a position that discounts the centrality of class, a position that advocates the reification of race and the artificial redefinition of categories like black and white.
> 
> By Bahar's logic, 30 years ago, she would have had to exclude herself from the non-white event she organised as she would have been seen as politically white by PoC activists and the politically black diaspora - whereas asians, for instance, were not.


Crock of crap. Stalinists are far more anti working class. And Bahar doesn't live thirty years ago, she wasn't even born then, so who cares whether she'd have been allowed into a meeting which would never have happened anyway. 

If you're going to be an ultra leftist buffoon, at least be a consistent ultra leftist buffoon.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

dialectician said:


> Don't be silly. That's not what I said. Obviously we solidarise with Stalinists and liberals fighting in their class interest. That is a given. But her whole position in the SU is an anti-working class position, a position that discounts the centrality of class, a position that advocates the reification of race and the artificial redefinition of categories like black and white.
> 
> By Bahar's logic, 30 years ago, she would have had to exclude herself from the non-white event she organised as she would have been seen as politically white by PoC activists and the politically black diaspora - whereas asians, for instance, were not.


She's in the bubble of student politics, she's got an unhealthy undercurrent of intersectionalism, she's come out with some anti-working class slogans.  She's somebody who might well have ended up in some 'professional diversity post' or personnel department. None of that's good or stuff I go anywhere near agreeing with.  But you are writing her off in equally absolutist tones, reducing the people we can have solidarity with to an absolute minimum, even when they are under attack from the state.  People's lives are messy, their experiences complex, she's not someone I'd discount or demonise - even if I disagree with her daft tweets and all that shit about 'white trash'.  FFS, I came out with all kinds of shit in my 20s.... 30s, 40s... right through to shit I've no doubt been talking today at 54.


----------



## cesare (Oct 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> She's in the bubble of student politics, she's got an unhealthy undercurrent of intersectionalism, she's come out with some anti-working class slogans.  She's somebody who might well have ended up in some 'professional diversity post' or personnel department. None of that's good or stuff I go anywhere near agreeing with.  But you are writing her off in equally absolutist tones, reducing the people we can have solidarity with to an absolute minimum, even when they are under attack from the state.  People's lives are messy, their experiences complex, she's not someone I'd discount or demonise - even if I disagree with her daft tweets and all that shit about 'white trash'.  FFS, I came out with all kinds of shit in my 20s.... 30s, 40s... right through to shit I've no doubt been talking today at 54.


Exactly. Under attack from the state but orchestrated by the liberal press via their old boys network.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

cesare said:


> Exactly. Under attack from the state but orchestrated by the liberal press via their old boys network.


I doubt we'll hear the full story on where the original complaint came from on this.  Somebody will have contacted the old bill, but like you say, what led up to that is the interesting bit.  Could have been sorry random outraged student tory, but it's unlikely.


----------



## cesare (Oct 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I doubt we'll hear the full story on where the original complaint came from on this.  Somebody will have contacted the old bill, but like you say, what led up to that is the interesting bit.  Could have been sorry random outraged student tory, but it's unlikely.


Might be worth turning up at court to find out.


----------



## cutandsplice (Oct 6, 2015)

cesare said:


> Might be worth turning up at court to find out.


h


cesare said:


> Might be worth turning up at court to find out.


She probably reported herself.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 6, 2015)

as you do like. Loon


----------



## cutandsplice (Oct 6, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> as you do like. Loon


Or maybe it was her handler?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

cutandsplice said:


> Or maybe it was her handler?


What the fuck are you on about?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 6, 2015)

cutandsplice said:


> Or maybe it was her handler?


I was about to laugh and poo poo it (i still do poo poo such an idea) but the sad sackery of our spycops is legendary. Slayers of anarcho-green outfits! Bringers of division to shonky far right fight clubs! Losing it so bad you go native and have a kid with an activist!

I don't know why they bother.


----------



## cutandsplice (Oct 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> What the fuck are you on about?


OR MAYBE IT WAS HER HANDLER?
Is that easier for you to read?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

The possible complainant?
Expel Bahar Mustafa from Goldsmiths University for Criminal Misconduct: Bahar Mustafa should be removed from study at Goldsmiths University.

*Bahar Mustafa should be removed from Goldsmiths University in all aspects with police interaction and degree revocation.*



*Andy Keene* Birmingham, United Kingdom


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

*Police Involvement/Scotland Yard*

*'Petition Update'*

*Police Involvement/Scotland Yard*





*Andy Keene*
"Birmingham, United Kingdom
22 May 2015 — Hi all, thank you for your patience with me as I am dealing with a lot of media outlets at the moment and I am trying to convey the message across without it being sidetracked by the sheer mind boggling lunacy of the far left.

I am still collecting information from Goldsmiths students which will be forwarded to the police and I thank you for your patience.

I will not let this issue get sidetracked from the point, just as it did with the authorities in the Rochdale case, if we are not listened to, we have the EU.

I ask you all to take in whatever news you can from all sides and form your own opinion, I believe this is the best way to be impartial until pure logic and reason becomes normality.

I ask the question still not answered or even addressed by the media:

Is the law for one and not all? Do we get less right to law than others because of our (pucker up) white skin colour?

That's what happened to the Rochdale girls, comic artists and anyone else that wants to express themselves against this very weird, militant life outlook.

Stay healthy Goldsmiths and indeed, the rest of planet earth; regardless of your skin colour."


----------



## Vintage Paw (Oct 6, 2015)

Wow.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> That's what happened to the Rochdale girls, comic artists and anyone else that wants to express themselves against this very weird, militant life outlook.
> 
> .



...and there we have it....His 'Bigot much' sign...I raise him... 'Irony much'.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Oct 6, 2015)

But, but... it's like, reverse racism and it's just like, stop oppressing me guh.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2015)

_If_* this is the bloke who reported her, we'd have a massive irony - a racist buffoon reports an anti-racist to the police for something she said, essentially, as part of an inter-left low level spat... _and they take him up on it_. 

*but as this all heads for court, I'd better add I've no proof his complaint was the one policy acted upon.


----------



## Sirena (Oct 7, 2015)

Andy Keene (@BlockMe4Victory) | Twitter


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

Sirena said:


> Andy Keene (@BlockMe4Victory) | Twitter


Well, that's just about 100% conclusive.  Filthy bastard.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> The possible complainant?
> Expel Bahar Mustafa from Goldsmiths University for Criminal Misconduct: Bahar Mustafa should be removed from study at Goldsmiths University.
> 
> *Bahar Mustafa should be removed from Goldsmiths University in all aspects with police interaction and degree revocation.*
> ...


christ on a pogo stick, he's managed to include a reference to the Lee rigby murder in there amongst his frothing loonspuddery.  And to call for her degree to be revoked is just utterly ridiculous. 

I am no ardent supporter of her, but these charges are just ludicrous.  if this man is the complainant then I think the police have to explain why charges have been laid on allegations clearly made by a white mens rights activist with a chip on his shoulder when rape, torture and death threats made against women in a similar way are ignored.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

*Andy Keene* ‏@BlockMe4Victory  Sep 24
"Is "diversity" celebrated/mandatory/government sponsored in non white countries? Serious question."


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> *Andy Keene* ‏@BlockMe4Victory  Sep 24
> "Is "diversity" celebrated/mandatory/government sponsored in non white countries? Serious question."


This guy is just unbelievable.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> christ on a pogo stick, he's managed to include a reference to the Lee rigby murder in there amongst his frothing loonspuddery.  And to call for her degree to be revoked is just utterly ridiculous.
> 
> I am no ardent supporter of her, but these charges are just ludicrous.  if this man is the complainant then I think the police have to explain why charges have been laid on allegations clearly made by a white mens rights activist with a chip on his shoulder when rape, torture and death threats made against women in a similar way are ignored.


I think the stuff on his twitter makes it clear he's the one. He's even giving the press a separate email address to contact him on.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

Ah yes, and if you dig down into his twitter feed...

*Andy Keene* ‏@BlockMe4Victory  Sep 11
Fellow #gg #GamerGate folk. I'd appreciate if you shared this.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Ah yes, and if you dig down into his twitter feed...
> 
> *Andy Keene* ‏@BlockMe4Victory  Sep 11
> Fellow #gg #GamerGate folk. I'd appreciate if you shared this.


He also says on his twitter that all SJWs had his coming and she incited genocide.  GENO FUCKING CIDE FOR FUCKS SAKE. 

I have no words left. He clearly has problems with women.


----------



## two sheds (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Ah yes, and if you dig down into his twitter feed...
> 
> *Andy Keene* ‏@BlockMe4Victory  Sep 11
> Fellow #gg #GamerGate folk. I'd appreciate if you shared this.



Is that for real? 

"Cut Communists in half as they deserve no quarter"?

Sounds like hate speech to me  needs reporting to the police I'd say.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Ah yes, and if you dig down into his twitter feed...
> 
> *Andy Keene* ‏@BlockMe4Victory  Sep 11
> Fellow #gg #GamerGate folk. I'd appreciate if you shared this.



god the post-modern culture war is even stupider than the original


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

*Andy Keene* ‏@BlockMe4Victory  Aug 18
I designed a student safety system for rape couture. #OSU #OhioState #OhioStateUniversity #*RapeCouture*


----------



## J Ed (Oct 7, 2015)

She gets charged for this but Katie Hopkins can ape Der Sturmer in the Scum. Nice priorities Met you racist cunts


----------



## MrSki (Oct 7, 2015)

It is not the Police that decide if the prosecution is brought. It is the lawyers at the CPS. They must think there is something to go on.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 7, 2015)

MrSki said:


> It is not the Police that decide if the prosecution is brought. It is the lawyers at the CPS. They must think there is something to go on.



Fuck them too


----------



## MrSki (Oct 7, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Fuck them too


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

When this complaint was made, the police had an opportunity to say "eh?", "you are fucking joking, right?" and "if you don't get the fuck out of here, I'm going to charge you with wasting police time".


----------



## MrSki (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> When this complaint was made, the police had an opportunity to say "eh?", "you are fucking joking, right?" and "if you don't get the fuck out of here, I'm going to charge you with wasting police time".


Unless you have some inside info. then you don't know what the complaint is. So far it has been a bit of speculation but if you know more then please tell.


----------



## MrSki (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> The possible complainant?
> Expel Bahar Mustafa from Goldsmiths University for Criminal Misconduct: Bahar Mustafa should be removed from study at Goldsmiths University.


Is it possible that it is someone else?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

MrSki said:


> Is it possible that it is someone else?


It's possible that the police are responding to a claim from someone else, yes, but this twat is _boasting _that he complained.  He's already to go with an  email address for the press to contact him on.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

Well, if she's making genuine death threats to someone and stocking up on the kalashnikovs, I'll be the one who looks a div. For the moment though I'll assume this is some absurd, political decision to prosecute and a fucking monstrous waste of resources.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 7, 2015)

MrSki said:


> Is it possible that it is someone else?


If it is someone else, it's been copied word for word from one of his earlier rants. Literally word for word.


----------



## MrSki (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Well, if she's making genuine death threats to someone and stocking up on the kalashnikovs, I'll be the one who looks a div. For the moment though I'll assume this is some absurd, political decision to prosecute and a fucking monstrous waste of resources.


It probably is but the CPS should not take a case to court unless they think there is a realistic chance of getting a prosection. Mind you that has not always stopped them in the past.


----------



## MrSki (Oct 7, 2015)

Mind you he does come across as a total twat. If the case fails then maybe he could be done for wasting police time?


----------



## MrSki (Oct 7, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> If it is someone else, it's been copied word for word from one of his earlier rants. Literally word for word.


I am forming the opinion that it is this idiot. Hopefully the publicity generated by the case will harm him the most. What a tosser!


----------



## MrSki (Oct 7, 2015)

MrSki said:


> I am forming the opinion that it is this idiot. Hopefully the publicity generated by the case will harm him the most. What a tosser!


Then again, whoever at the CPS who has brought this case is throwing away their career.

Maybe there is another threat not reported.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

MrSki said:


> Then again, whoever at the CPS who has brought this case is throwing away their career.


anyone at the cps has already thrown away their career.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> Crock of crap. Stalinists are far more anti working class. And Bahar doesn't live thirty years ago, she wasn't even born then, so who cares whether she'd have been allowed into a meeting which would never have happened anyway.
> 
> If you're going to be an ultra leftist buffoon, at least be a consistent ultra leftist buffoon.



My point was that identity politics is mystical, ahistorical and anti-materialist crap.

Stalinism is anti working-class alright, but there are Stalinists from the working-class who can fight in their class interests. That much is a given if you've ever been involved in/organised/followed a strike outside your insulated UK bubble.

If you're going to be a closet trot, at least be more discreet about it.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> The possible complainant?
> Expel Bahar Mustafa from Goldsmiths University for Criminal Misconduct: Bahar Mustafa should be removed from study at Goldsmiths University.
> 
> *Bahar Mustafa should be removed from Goldsmiths University in all aspects with police interaction and degree revocation.*
> ...



Christ on a bike! I give up on this modern world. The two lunatics deserve each other.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Christ on a bike! I give up on this modern world. The two lunatics deserve each other.


don't do it cynicaleconomy


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> She's in the bubble of student politics, she's got an unhealthy undercurrent of intersectionalism, she's come out with some anti-working class slogans.  She's somebody who might well have ended up in some 'professional diversity post' or personnel department. None of that's good or stuff I go anywhere near agreeing with.  But you are writing her off in equally absolutist tones, reducing the people we can have solidarity with to an absolute minimum, even when they are under attack from the state.  People's lives are messy, their experiences complex, she's not someone I'd discount or demonise - even if I disagree with her daft tweets and all that shit about 'white trash'.  FFS, I came out with all kinds of shit in my 20s.... 30s, 40s... right through to shit I've no doubt been talking today at 54.



I'm not at all. She has been involved in far left politics for quite a while and was allegedly once a member of the SP for a very short while. There is a difference between defending and solidarising with a working-class reactionary or right winger against the state/cops and a left winger who has come out with some racist and devisive shit, and been instrumental in segrigating coloured people and containing their class unity/diverting it into useless metaphysical pursuits. All you're saying here is look at me, I'm abdicating responsibility.

I'm not demonising her. As I've repeatedly made clear, I find the charges against her totally disgusting, appalling and unacceptable. That doesn't mean I'm not going to criticise her because this idea - oh it could happen to us too, well, it could, but surely that's precisely more reason to be ruthless in ones critique.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Oct 7, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> christ on a pogo stick, he's managed to include a reference to the Lee rigby murder in there amongst his frothing loonspuddery.  And to call for her degree to be revoked is just utterly ridiculous.
> 
> I am no ardent supporter of her, but these charges are just ludicrous.  if this man is the complainant then I think the police have to explain why charges have been laid on allegations clearly made by a white mens rights activist with a chip on his shoulder when rape, torture and death threats made against women in a similar way are ignored.



Totally agree.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> She's in the bubble of student politics, she's got an unhealthy undercurrent of intersectionalism, she's come out with some anti-working class slogans.  She's somebody who might well have ended up in some 'professional diversity post' or personnel department. None of that's good or stuff I go anywhere near agreeing with.  But you are writing her off in equally absolutist tones, reducing the people we can have solidarity with to an absolute minimum, even when they are under attack from the state.  People's lives are messy, their experiences complex, she's not someone I'd discount or demonise - even if I disagree with her daft tweets and all that shit about 'white trash'.  FFS, I came out with all kinds of shit in my 20s.... 30s, 40s... right through to shit I've no doubt been talking today at 54.



This is crude good guy bad guy analysis of the state tbf. It isn't some behemoth that we just smash and jolly good, we're finally liberated.

Yes, the state is an organ/instrument of class rule and domination. That much is self-evident. But that's no reason to conceive it as this kind of uniform monolithic juggernaut on an onward march.

The solidarity politics re: Mustafa (let me say again that the charges should be condemned vigorously and without apology) just seem to be emotional brainrot.


----------



## gosub (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> When this complaint was made, the police had an opportunity to say "eh?", "you are fucking joking, right?" and "if you don't get the fuck out of here, I'm going to charge you with wasting police time".



yeah but solved hate crime +1 looks good on the statistics.


----------



## cesare (Oct 7, 2015)

*



			Let’s start off by talking about you and your background. I understand “Andy Keene”, the name on the change.org petition, isn’t your real name.
		
Click to expand...

*


> _Keane:_ Actually it is sort of my real name – there’s just an “a” in place of one of the “e”s.
> 
> *And you’re happy to reveal that?*
> 
> ...



Exclusive: Student Behind The Bahar Mustafa Petition Reveals Why He Wants Her Out - Breitbart

He admits orchestrating all of it.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

cesare said:


> Exclusive: Student Behind The Bahar Mustafa Petition Reveals Why He Wants Her Out - Breitbart
> 
> He admits orchestrating all of it.



It might be more accurate to say he claims credit for orchestrating all of it. The guy appears from the other stuff quoted on this thread to be a loon and a fantasist, so I suggest we don't simply take him and his claims at face value (which isn't to deny that they may actually be true).

Anyway, until this turned up I was thinking that Bahar Mustapha was a little confused and had some slightly strange ideas, but compared to this prick she's like a model of sanity 

(not an expression of personal solidarity, BTW, just a recognition that sometimes "plague on both your houses" isn't the appropriate response and it's OK to take a side)


----------



## Kumalala (Oct 7, 2015)

This guy obviously hasn't thought about the danger to the student population if the university didn't have a diversity officer


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Oct 7, 2015)

Kumalala said:


> This guy obviously hasn't thought about the danger to the student population if the university didn't have a diversity officer



What, lack of parasites at university?

You're going to have to do better than that if you want to make an intelligent and incisive critique of this cunt.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 7, 2015)

Kumalala said:


> This guy obviously hasn't thought about the danger to the student population if the university didn't have a diversity officer



He doesn't care. He implies the UK is a 'White country'....on top of all the other twaddle he has tweeted 



> *Andy Keene* ‏@*BlockMe4Victory*  Sep 24
> Is "diversity" celebrated/mandatory/government sponsored in non white countries? Serious question.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Ah yes, and if you dig down into his twitter feed...
> 
> *Andy Keene* ‏@BlockMe4Victory  Sep 11
> Fellow #gg #GamerGate folk. I'd appreciate if you shared this.


I am shocked - SHOCKED, I say - that this fellow is a Gater. WHODATHUNKIT, etc.


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

dialectician said:


> My point was that identity politics is mystical, ahistorical and anti-materialist crap.
> 
> Stalinism is anti working-class alright, but there are Stalinists from the working-class who can fight in their class interests. That much is a given if you've ever been involved in/organised/followed a strike outside your insulated UK bubble.
> 
> If you're going to be a closet trot, at least be more discreet about it.


mystical? ahistorical?  utter, utter drivel. do you even know what those words mean? 

and what has your defense of stalinism got to do with anything? lots of people, including those supporting identity politics, can fight for their own class interests.  so fucking what? 



dialectician said:


> Totally agree.


no you dont, you liar. agreeing with that contradicts everything you've said before.


----------



## likesfish (Oct 7, 2015)

nobody's ever said if only there was a diversity officer .

This seems idiotic while #killallwhitemen looks really dodgy if I can figure out where its coming from with 5 minutes of googling I'd expect lawyers to do the same.
 still thinks she's a pratt but this is up there with the robin hood airport terror tweet for the stupids


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 7, 2015)

so it turns out the blokes a neckbeard gamergater. well, its #teambahar for me now. God.

the met are such clowns, this is worse than the time they tried to do that bloke over his stash of fisting DVD's


----------



## killer b (Oct 7, 2015)

There's a lot of outrage on this thread about an assumed complainant and and assumed charge.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)

The Internet runs on outrage.


----------



## seventh bullet (Oct 7, 2015)

Neckbeard.  Fedora.  I've only recently come across this stuff.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 7, 2015)

and cats


----------



## cantsin (Oct 7, 2015)

Sirena said:


> Andy Keene (@BlockMe4Victory) | Twitter



edit.


----------



## toggle (Oct 7, 2015)

likesfish said:


> nobody's ever said if only there was a diversity officer .
> 
> This seems idiotic while #killallwhitemen looks really dodgy if I can figure out where its coming from with 5 minutes of googling I'd expect lawyers to do the same.
> still thinks she's a pratt but this is up there with the robin hood airport terror tweet for the stupids


judging frim the reactions from the police to some of the self appointed feminist talking heads (what is fb, what is twitter, cant handle an email attachment, loose documents sent via email several times) , I wouldn't be so sure half of them know what googling is.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

dialectician said:


> This is crude good guy bad guy analysis of the state tbf. It isn't some behemoth that we just smash and jolly good, we're finally liberated.
> 
> Yes, the state is an organ/instrument of class rule and domination. That much is self-evident. But that's no reason to conceive it as this kind of uniform monolithic juggernaut on an onward march.
> 
> The solidarity politics re: Mustafa (let me say again that the charges should be condemned vigorously and without apology) just seem to be emotional brainrot.


Within the left, I do think her politics _are _divisive.  However, the way you react to a situation isn't with a slide rule,  I'll admit there's empathy about the way she must be feeling under this attack.  No apologies for that.  The ways I disagree with her, the anti-working class element of her politics are obvious and have been discussed on this thread.  They remain there, but don't need loudly proclaiming or to be rehearsed every time we discuss the state attack on her - an attack that plenty of people are experiencing.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

killer b said:


> There's a lot of outrage on this thread about an assumed complainant and and assumed charge.


Yeah, and as I've said I'll be the who has been doing a fair bit of barking up the wrong tree if that's the case. However, it _looks like_ the case relates to the tweets and messages discussed on this thread (dates are the same).  Also, whilst he might not be the complainant the police have acted upon, he has certainly been in contact (he boasts about it).  He also looked to be ready to take press calls on the day the prosecution was announced - and he has certainly been the one orchestrating the campaign against her.


----------



## JHE (Oct 7, 2015)

Kumalala said:


> This guy obviously hasn't thought about the danger to the student population if the university didn't have a diversity officer





dialectician said:


> What, lack of parasites at university?
> 
> You're going to have to do better than that if you want to make an intelligent and incisive critique of this cunt.



I think Kumalala was being heavily ironic.


----------



## gosub (Oct 7, 2015)

Kumalala said:


> This guy obviously hasn't thought about the danger to the student population if the university didn't have a diversity officer


Her actions, which hindered disabled students, is why I'm surprised Goldsmith's haven't got rid of her


----------



## cesare (Oct 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> Her actions, which hindered disabled students, is why I'm surprised Goldsmith's haven't got rid of her


Goldsmiths can't. She doesn't work for them, it's an elected post. Back up thread but it's a long thread.


----------



## killer b (Oct 7, 2015)

Goldsmiths couldn't get rid of her, it's an elected role.


----------



## gosub (Oct 7, 2015)

cesare said:


> Goldsmiths can't. She doesn't work for them, it's an elected post. Back up thread but it's a long thread.


Was trying to think of the right collective noun (couldn't not enough coffee yet), students can and some did, start an impeachment procedure, presumably they didn't get the numbers.  But left it at Goldsmiths coz its down to the people there, not some unrelated fuckwit on the outside


----------



## cesare (Oct 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> Was trying to think of the right collective noun (couldn't not enough coffee yet), students can and some did, start an impeachment procedure, presumably they didn't get the numbers


They hardly got any numbers iirc.


----------



## gosub (Oct 7, 2015)

cesare said:


> They hardly got any numbers iirc.


that, to me, reflects badly on Goldsmiths ?"alumni"?


----------



## cesare (Oct 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> that, to me, reflects badly on Goldsmiths ?"alumni"?


It may reflect well on the alumni if it's been an orchestrated and unwarranted campaign against her, that they don't support


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> that, to me, reflects badly on Goldsmiths ?"alumni"?



alumni is graduates no? 'Student body' would do


----------



## gosub (Oct 7, 2015)

cesare said:


> It may reflect well on the alumni if it's been an orchestrated and unwarranted campaign against her, that they don't support


iirc it was organised by some of the disabled students that had been affected


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> that, to me, reflects badly on Goldsmiths ?"alumni"?


No doubt most couldn't care less about the whole affair. I don't blame them tbh.


----------



## gosub (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No doubt most couldn't care less about the whole affair. I don't blame them tbh.


how very modern of them.   And now some external keyboard warrior with an agenda, is doing, what can only make her come across as being valid....strip her of her degree- In no way appropriate


----------



## treelover (Oct 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> iirc it was organised by some of the disabled students that had been affected



How were they affected?

I don't think she should be defended either.


----------



## gosub (Oct 7, 2015)

treelover said:


> How were they affected?
> 
> I don't think she should be defended either.


see further back up thread, were unable to use or even access the facilities laid on for them due to protest she had organised,and would only attend meeting to discuss matter with them, flanked by her follow protesters.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> that, to me, reflects badly on Goldsmiths ?"alumni"?



Not only did the attempt to hold a referendum to eject her from the post fail because not enough people backed the idea, she was then re-elected to serve another term in the same role, so a significant number of Goldsmiths' students must have thought she was doing something right. 

Fucking democracy, eh


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> how very modern of them.


Student politics has always been a minority interest. But the politics of student politics? Why should they care?


----------



## gosub (Oct 7, 2015)

andysays said:


> Not only did the attempt to hold a referendum to eject her from the post fail because not enough people backed the idea, she was then re-elected to serve another term in the same role, so a significant number of Goldsmiths' students must have thought she was doing something right.
> 
> Fucking democracy, eh


can't find an election subsequent to her uncontested win in early March, the no confidence thing was May


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)

Did we ever get to the bottom of whether she could be classed as a PoC herself or not?


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Did we ever get to the bottom of whether she could be classed as a PoC herself or not?



<Unwatches thread>


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Did we ever get to the bottom of whether she could be classed as a PoC herself or not?


She's Turkish ffs!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Kumalala said:


> This guy obviously hasn't thought about the danger to the student population if the university didn't have a diversity officer


i imagine the *college* has more than one person looking out for diversity, tho the *student union* might not. the university of london rather larger than goldsmiths, which is but one of its constituent members.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)

andysays said:


> <Unwatches thread>



That was entertaining. A veeeeery long way back up thread. OU and PM iirc.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> She's Turkish ffs!



Right on cue.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> She's Turkish ffs!


is colour denoted by nationality?


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)




----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 7, 2015)

you had to do it citizen. You had to peel the scab off and poke at it


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> is colour denoted by nationality?



And if it is, can we have an approved list of which nationalities qualify?

(curse you Citizen66 for pulling me back in   )


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> is colour denoted by nationality?


Don't ask me, ask the racists!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


>


i wonder if the white oxford educated academick dwyer has acquired turkish nationality, and so the apparent right to be a poc in ou's eyes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i wonder if the white oxford educated academick dwyer has acquired turkish nationality, and so the apparent right to be a poc in ou's eyes.


Of course not. You are deliberately stirring


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Don't ask me, ask the racists!


you seem to be among them, by raising her nationlity as tho it has bearing on her ethnicity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Of course not. You are deliberately stirring


so what is the point of your 'she's turkish' post?


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> can't find an election subsequent to her uncontested win in early March, the no confidence thing was May



I was assuming, possibly wrongly, that each post coincided with the academic year and that there's been another election since the original outbreak of hostilities.

Apologies if I'm wrong, I'm not sure I can be arsed to check, TBH


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you seem to be among them, by raising her nationlity as tho it has bearing on her ethnicity.


Nope, I just accept her identification as a minority.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> so what is the point of your 'she's turkish' post?


Cos racists wouldn't consider Turks to be white.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Nope, I just accept her identification as a minority.


tho that's not what you said, which was in direct relation to people of colour.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> tho that's not what you said, which was in direct relation to people of colour.


?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Cos racists wouldn't consider Turks to be white.


Even before finding out that they are Turkish?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Cos racists wouldn't consider Turks to be white.


and as you appear to consider turks not to be white...


----------



## Belushi (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Cos racists wouldn't consider Turks to be white.



I've just googled and it appears to be the subject of some confused debate among racists :thumbs :


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> and as you appear to consider turks not to be white...


Shows how insufficient black and white labels are. People are racist towards Turks all the same.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Cos racists wouldn't consider Turks to be white.



I don't think there's a universal set of views held by all racists.


----------



## killer b (Oct 7, 2015)




----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Even before finding out that they are Turkish?


She doesn't look enough like the racists for them to even consider asking first.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Don't ask me, ask the racists!



I'm pretty sure that the term Person/People of Colour does not originate with "the racists".

I'm also pretty sure that there is no single universally accepted definition of what it means/who it covers, which makes it next to useless for any purposes other than claiming some sort of reverse-privileged status, as in the sort of context we're examining here...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Shows how insufficient black and white labels are. People are racist towards Turks all the same.


i"m aware of that so only using the internal evidence of your posts.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I don't think there's a universal set of views held by all racists.


No, we are wasting out time here. Mostly white men debating whether a brown person is white enough to be considered white. I feel sick we're even discussing it, so no more.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> No, we are wasting out time here. Mostly white men debating whether a brown person is white enough to be considered white.


Is that what the discussion is? Are we not allowed to attempt to unpick prejudice and work out what exactly it is that people are prejudiced against?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 7, 2015)

The point is, bahar is a bit of a bellend for various reasons. The person bringing the charge however is orders of magnitude worse and an example of why the human race is doomed. This person was begging for twitter fistbumps from gamergaters, a milue that feeds into some of the most reactionary shit. So its clear that in this instance any sane person would be on #teambahar.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> No, we are wasting out time here. Mostly white men debating whether a brown person is white enough to be considered white. I feel sick we're even discussing it, so no more.


that may be what you're discussing: i was looking at your apparent conflation of race and nationality.


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

Bahar faces discrimination because of her ethnicity.  That is racism. The rest is irrelevant.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Shows how insufficient black and white labels are. People are racist towards Turks all the same.


what a curious turn of phrase


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> Bahar faces discrimination because of her ethnicity.  That is racism. The rest is irrelevant.


Yep.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> that may be what you're discussing: i was looking at your apparent conflation of race and nationality.


As belboid says, it's about ethnicity, not race or nationality.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> Bahar faces discrimination because of her ethnicity.  That is racism. The rest is irrelevant.


tbh if I were a diversity officer, I'd be looking for a more nuanced answer than that, looking into how different people are discriminated against, where, in what circumstances, with what motivation, and by whom. 

OU said that this shows how insufficient 'black' and 'white' labels are. Well, um, quite. And that applies to Bahar's use of them too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> As belboid says, it's about ethnicity, not race or nationality.


so why bring up the turkish bit if you now feel it irrelevant?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> As belboid says, it's about ethnicity, not race or nationality.


Problem with that is that you end up with Welsh people calling racism over anti-Welsh feeling, and doing so with a straight face by claiming 'Welsh' as an ethnicity.


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbh if I were a diversity officer, I'd be looking for a more nuanced answer than that, looking into how different people are discriminated against, where, in what circumstances, with what motivation, and by whom.


you mean racism is not simple and straightforward and takes somewhat different forms depending upon various factors?  Yes, but so what.  It is still racism. 



> OU said that this shows how insufficient 'black' and 'white' labels are. Well, um, quite. And that applies to Bahar's use of them too.


sorry, I am not at all clear what point you are trying to make.


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Problem with that is that you end up with Welsh people calling racism over anti-Welsh feeling, and doing so with a straight face by claiming 'Welsh' as an ethnicity.


do I? I dont think so.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> do I? I dont think so.


Not you personally. But it happens. It has happened. I used that example specifically because it has happened.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> so why bring up the turkish bit if you now feel it irrelevant?


I don't think it is irrelevant.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 7, 2015)

wouldn't matter if she looked like snow white, the name alone is enough to get racist shit. Can't expect hatred to folow any rationale really, unless its wrapped up in the psuedo culture war paralogic beloved of serial masturbators and people who would have been in the Black hundreds had they been born in a different time and place


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I don't think it is irrelevant.


and then it's back to the conflation of nationality and ethnicity and why you think that a good idea.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)

The original argument was in reversal though, if we cannot truly label who is or isn't White then how can Bashar? 

#killallshadesofgrey


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 7, 2015)

Some of this reminds me of comments I've seen on Facebook that "white people have never experienced  racism". Mentioning the Irish experience in the 70s and 80s usually shuts them up.


----------



## Belushi (Oct 7, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Some of this reminds me of comments I've seen on Facebook that "white people have never experienced  racism". Mentioning the Irish experience in the 70s and 80s usually shuts them up.



Or the East European experience in the UK now.


----------



## Fedayn (Oct 7, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Or the East European experience in the UK now.


 


Blagsta said:


> Some of this reminds me of comments I've seen on Facebook that "white people have never experienced  racism". Mentioning the Irish experience in the 70s and 80s usually shuts them up.


 
Or Jews...


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Problem with that is that you end up with Welsh people calling racism over anti-Welsh feeling, and doing so with a straight face by claiming 'Welsh' as an ethnicity.


That's not unreasonable, is it?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> and then it's back to the conflation of nationality and ethnicity and why you think that a good idea.


It seems you've conflated them, not me.


----------



## Belushi (Oct 7, 2015)

My ethnicity is welsh :thumbs :


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

This report doesn't add any more detail, but the way they describe it makes it clear it was about #killallwhitemen tweets.
London woman Bahar Mustafa was arrested for allegedly tweeting the hashtag #killallwhitemen


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> That's not unreasonable, is it?


I think it is unreasonable, yes. Not all prejudice is racism.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think it is unreasonable, yes. Not all prejudice is racism.


I think this only serves to highlight the poverty of the word racism.


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I think this only serves to highlight the poverty of the word racism.


racism = prejudice *+* power

Otherwise it is simply prejudice


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> racism = prejudice *+* power
> 
> Otherwise it is simply prejudice


Makes sense


----------



## likesfish (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> racism = prejudice *+* power
> 
> Otherwise it is simply prejudice


 in special snowflake tumblr world
in the rest of the world

_noun_

the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
"theories of racism"
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
"a programme to combat racism"
synonyms: racial discrimination, racialism, racial prejudice/bigotry, xenophobia,chauvinism, bigotry, bias, intolerance; More


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> racism = prejudice *+* power
> 
> Otherwise it is simply prejudice



Except that simply begs the question of what exactly do we mean by the words prejudice and power?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> It seems you've conflated them, not me.


no, it doesn't. not unless i posted under your name the comment 'she's turkish' a page or two back.


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

likesfish said:


> in special snowflake tumblr world
> in the rest of the world
> 
> _noun_
> ...


oh well, if its in an online dictionary, who could argue??!! 

A simple look at the supposed synonyms should show why that definition is grossly insufficient, that effectively would equate racism with being biased against tories.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> racism = prejudice *+* power
> 
> Otherwise it is simply prejudice



Hmmm. That's the logic some use to claim that black people can't be racist. 

Why not keep it simple: racism is prejudice based on race. (Allowing that definitions of race are hotly contested and vary by person.)


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> no, it doesn't. not unless i posted under your name the comment 'she's turkish' a page or two back.



TBH, this seems like a remarkably pointless line to take, even for you.

You assumed that OU was referring to her nationality rather than her ethnicity, and while his subsequent responses may have been a little confused, there's nothing being served by continuing to pursue this point other, than your ego.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hmmm. That's the logic some use to claim that black people can't be racist.
> 
> Why not keep it simple: racism is prejudice based on race. (Allowing that definitions of race are hotly contested and vary by person.)



And some racism carries more weight than others.


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Why not keep it simple: racism is prejudice based on race. (Allowing that definitions of race are hotly contested and vary by person.)


because that ignores the power structures that allow racism to flourish. As a marxist, I always look at the power dynamic, who benefits, and how does it prop up the ruling class.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> And some racism carries more weight than others.


Yep. But you can't encapsulate that within the term 'racism'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> because that ignores the power structures that allow racism to flourish..


No it doesn't. It just accepts that you can't describe those power structures with one word.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> no, it doesn't. not unless i posted under your name the comment 'she's turkish' a page or two back.


You're the one who suggested it was a nationality, not me.
Not that you give a shit about the issue either way. You just want to sew discord


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

likesfish said:


> in special snowflake tumblr world
> in the rest of the world
> 
> _noun_
> ...


The definition you give suggests that racism is synonymous with xenophobia, chauvinism, bigotry and intolerance.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hmmm. That's the logic some use to claim that black people can't be racist.
> 
> Why not keep it simple: racism is prejudice based on race. (Allowing that definitions of race are hotly contested and vary by person.)


But then you get all those islamophobes claiming not to be racists.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hmmm. That's the logic some use to claim that black people can't be racist.
> 
> Why not keep it simple: racism is prejudice based on race. (Allowing that definitions of race are hotly contested and vary by person.)



Or based on perceived race, perhaps.

This kind of brings us back round to where this began where Bahar Mustapha was quoted here as saying


> There have been charges laid against me that I am racist and sexist towards white men. I, an ethnic minority woman, cannot be racist or sexist towards white men, because racism and sexism describe structures of privilege based on race and gender. Therefore, women of colour and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist, since we do not stand to benefit from such a system.


This line of argument isn't original with her, but she's stating it as if it's universally accepted, which it clearly isn't.

It might also have been more effective if she had rebutted the idea that she was racist etc by explaining why she thought it was appropriate to host a "BME Women and non-binary event only", which appears to mean one from which white men, amongst others, were excluded, rather than getting into the "PoC can't be racist" argument.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> But then you get all those islamophobes claiming not to be racists.


What they claim and what you think about their claim are two very different things, though. If said islamophobes are coopting notions of race into their prejudice, then they're being racist.

In fact, that clears up problems distinguishing between islamophobia with racist aspects - hating Muslims, as a group - and someone just hating Islam.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> You're the one who suggested it was a nationality, not me.
> Not that you give a shit about the issue either way. You just want to sew discord



I think it should be "sow discord", but however you spell it, he's certainly bound for the 8th Circle of Dante's Hell


----------



## Dowie (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Problem with that is that you end up with Welsh people calling racism over anti-Welsh feeling, and doing so with a straight face by claiming 'Welsh' as an ethnicity.



it is isn't it?

IIRC a lorry driver was even found guilty in regards to this after a road rage incident

edit - got the quote wrong:

Englishman fined for racism after insulting Welsh policeman



> Prosecutor Lucy Dowdall said: "He told them: 'I don't like you because you're Welsh, you're breathing and you're here'."
> 
> Mackett was charged with using racially aggravated threatening words by magistrates in Rhondda, South Wales.



why is the existence of 'welsh' as an ethnicity a problem?


----------



## cesare (Oct 7, 2015)

*Race*
(1)Race includes—

(a)colour;

(b)nationality;

(c)ethnic or national origins.

(2)In relation to the protected characteristic of race—

(a)a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a person of a particular racial group;

(b)a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to persons of the same racial group.

(3)A racial group is a group of persons defined by reference to race; and a reference to a person's racial group is a reference to a racial group into which the person falls.

(4)The fact that a racial group comprises two or more distinct racial groups does not prevent it from constituting a particular racial group. 

Equality Act 2010


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No it doesn't. It just accepts that you can't describe those power structures with one word.


whereas i think it is incredibly useful to describe those power structures with one word, otherwise we get to idiotic distinguishing between racism, really bad racism, and totally and utterly bad racism.


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

Dowie said:


> it is isn't it?
> 
> IIRC a lorry driver was even found guilty in regards to this after a road rage incident
> 
> ...


that quotes 'racially aggravated' not racist.  That is the very difference I am arguing


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

That legal definition isn't without problems. 'bloody taffs' = racist; 'bloody scousers' = not racist.


----------



## Dowie (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That legal definition isn't without problems. 'bloody taffs' = racist; 'bloody scousers' = not racist.



you could say that about Turks or Irish people or travelers too... though I think 'taffs' have more claim to being an ethnic group that scousers. Separate country, language etc..

I'm still not clear on why 'Welsh' being an ethnicity is a problem? Would you consider Irish to be an ethnicity?


----------



## Dowie (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> that quotes 'racially aggravated' not racist.  That is the very difference I am arguing



and diversity officer has been charged over a 'racially motivated' communication no?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 7, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> Some of this reminds me of comments I've seen on Facebook that "white people have never experienced  racism". Mentioning the Irish experience in the 70s and 80s usually shuts them up.



many irish ended up on slavers ships way back when, before they were welcomed into Whitehood. 

its one of those things where race cuts across class lines imo. Chuka getting a tug and a working over from OB cos a black mans in a nice car, for hypothetical example. Mans totally of the upper class, but to two plods pulling him ove he's just another nigger in a car he shouldn't have.

I dunno, I'd spend all week slagging of some intersctionalist bellend but to see it come from the right, and a particularly virulent aggressive section of it. Well fuck that. She may be a bit of a cockhead but the person gunning for her aligns with a milue that use rape threats, hacking and murder threats as their way of enforcing a set of social and political conservative mores fast running out of their grasp. Fuck those people. I hadn't even noticed the fuckers before they started wading into SF and Fantasy and computer game stuff to issue death threats to people doing feminist crit of games and stuff. Salt mines imo.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

Dowie said:


> you could say that about Turks or Irish people or travelers too... though I think 'taffs' have more claim to being an ethnic group that scousers. Separate country, language etc..
> 
> I'm still not clear on why 'Welsh' being an ethnicity is a problem? Would you consider Irish to be an ethnicity?


If a Welsh person living in England told me they were an ethnic minority and that they knew what it was like to experience racism, I would probably find it hard to take them too seriously. Regional prejudices aren't the same as racism. Not all prejudice is racism, and not all racism is equal.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If a Welsh person living in England told me they were an ethnic minority and that they knew what it was like to experience racism, I would probably find it hard to take them too seriously. Regional prejudices aren't the same as racism. Not all prejudice is racism, and not all racism is equal.


It's a shit word, racism. It clearly doesn't serve us very well.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> It's a shit word, racism. It clearly doesn't serve us very well.


Hard to define precisely. But I generally know it clear as day when I see it.


----------



## Dowie (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If a Welsh person living in England told me they were an ethnic minority and that they knew what it was like to experience racism, I would probably find it hard to take them too seriously. Regional prejudices aren't the same as racism. Not all prejudice is racism, and not all racism is equal.



Yes I'm aware not all racism is equal. But the question was why is 'Welsh' being an ethnicity a problem in itself? Since you consider 'Welsh' being an ethnicity to be a problem I'm curious as to whether you consider 'Irish' to be an ethnicity? Or is prejudice towards Irish people also just a 'regional prejudice'?


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

Dowie said:


> and diversity officer has been charged over a 'racially motivated' communication no?


you haven't been following this actual discussion very closely, have you? Prick


----------



## Dowie (Oct 7, 2015)

belboid said:


> you haven't been following this actual discussion very closely, have you? Prick



I was replying a particular post re: a group being an 'ethnic group' apparently being a 'problem', cunt (seems to be standard to chuck in a random insult when you get wound up on here)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

Dowie said:


> Yes I'm aware not all racism is equal. But the question was why is 'Welsh' being an ethnicity a problem in itself? Since you consider 'Welsh' being an ethnicity to be a problem I'm curious as to whether you consider 'Irish' to be an ethnicity?


I don't necessarily consider 'Welsh' as an ethnicity as a problem. That wasn't really my point. Problem here is the usual one of categorising a fuzzy world into sharply defined boxes. Not all ethnicities carry the same meaning or weight, and some are subsumed by wider ethnic groups.


----------



## belboid (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If a Welsh person living in England told me they were an ethnic minority and that they knew what it was like to experience racism, I would probably find it hard to take them too seriously. Regional prejudices aren't the same as racism. Not all prejudice is racism, and not all racism is equal.


that's because racism is more than just prejudice, as i argued earlier.  The point of the word being specific is to avoid this kind of argument


----------



## Belushi (Oct 7, 2015)

From where I'm sitting in downtown Tottenham racism, prejudice & power is a hell of complicated subject, but for all the bad shit that happens round here from time to time I'm glad that most of the time people rub along well.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 7, 2015)

cutandsplice said:


> Or maybe it was her handler?


More likely to have been your mum.


----------



## Dowie (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't necessarily consider 'Welsh' as an ethnicity as a problem. That wasn't really my point. Problem here is the usual one of categorising a fuzzy world into sharply defined boxes. Not all ethnicities carry the same meaning or weight, and some are subsumed by wider ethnic groups.



That is true... but if someone is turned down for a job in England by say an English person on the basis that they're 'Welsh' or 'Irish' or 'Scottish' then the effect is still the same as if they were not from a regional ethnic group and needs to be dealt with in the same way. I don't for a minute expect that they'd experience some of the other every day racism that other groups do but I don't see that classifying them as ethnic groups is problematic. And yes some individual openly expressing hatred and/or abusing someone purely on the basis of them being Irish, Welsh etc.. needs to be dealt with too.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 7, 2015)

I would argue that one of the reasons Scousers get such stick is that their Irishness and Welshness.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

From the twitter of the bloke who seemingly grassed her up to the police ('Andy Greene')

"TLT 2020 ‏@twilightz2020  · 20h20 hours ago  
they should have some diverse rapey types interrogate her"


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> From the twitter of the bloke who seemingly grassed her up to the police ('Andy Greene')
> 
> "TLT 2020 ‏@twilightz2020  · 20h20 hours ago
> they should have some diverse rapey types interrogate her"



Perhaps he should be reported for inciting rape?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 7, 2015)

Plumdaff said:


> I would argue that one of the reasons Scousers get such stick is that their Irishness and Welshness.


Yep, agreed. But imho if you start shouting 'racism' at every form of prejudice, you lose sight of the vast differences between those prejudices, differences not just in degree but in kind.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 7, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, agreed. But imho if you start shouting 'racism' at every form of prejudice, you lose sight of the vast differences between those prejudices, differences not just in degree but in kind.



Did I claim racism?


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> From the twitter of the bloke who seemingly grassed her up to the police ('Andy Greene')
> 
> "TLT 2020 ‏@twilightz2020  · 20h20 hours ago
> they should have some diverse rapey types interrogate her"





I thought it was Andy Keane / Keene?


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)




----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> You're the one who suggested it was a nationality, not me.


you say you didn't mean it as a nationality _now._ but you could have said that earlier, if that's what you actually meant, and saved everyone a great deal of trouble. but as you didn't i don't think you're being absolutely honest here.





> Not that you give a shit about the issue either way. You just want to sew discord


i believe it is impossible to sew discord. or to knit it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

andysays said:


> TBH, this seems like a remarkably pointless line to take, even for you.
> 
> You assumed that OU was referring to her nationality rather than her ethnicity, and while his subsequent responses may have been a little confused, there's nothing being served by continuing to pursue this point other, than your ego.


thank you for your input. i will take it under advisement, and expect to see you take your own advice.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

andysays said:


> I think it should be "sow discord", but however you spell it, he's certainly bound for the 8th Circle of Dante's Hell


i doubt it.


----------



## Belushi (Oct 7, 2015)

Hmmm Sorcery maybe


----------



## Belushi (Oct 7, 2015)

I've just had to google Simony


----------



## emanymton (Oct 7, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Hmmm Sorcery maybe


It certainly won't be flattery.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Belushi said:


> I've just had to google Simony


never had the opportunity to indulge in that


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i doubt it.
> 
> View attachment 77791



Better read a bit further to Canto XXVII before you get too complacent


> Circle 8 Bolgia 9: Sowers of Discord
> Inferno, Canto XXVII is full of sinners which are guilty of sowers of discord, or one who is driven to act on other's vulnerabilities and is driven solely on their own self-interests. These sinners are believed to have ripped apart the community in which they belong. Within this section, there are members guilty of Sowers of Religious Discord, Sowers of Political Discord, and Sower of Discord Between Kinsmen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

andysays said:


> Better read a bit further to Canto XXVI before you get too complacent


if i'm in the same circle as sorcerors i think i'll be in good - or at least entertaining - company.

you'll doubtless be in that part of paradise where bores and whingers reside.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

"Circle 8 Bolgia 9: Sowers of Discord
 Inferno, Canto XXVII is full of sinners which are guilty of sowers of discord, or one who is driven to act on other's vulnerabilities and is driven solely on their own self-interests. These sinners are believed to have ripped apart the community in which they belong. Within this section, there are members guilty of Sowers of Religious Discord, Sowers of Political Discord, and Sower of Discord Between Kinsmen."

I'd have a lot more respect for Urban's FAQs if they were written like this.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 7, 2015)

Belushi said:


> I've just had to google Simony


deffo not raised prod then


----------



## Belushi (Oct 7, 2015)

It's as if Dante had read the boards


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I'd have a lot more respect for Urban's FAQs if they were written like this.





> The way this Bolgia is described is in relation to a battlefield...The devil harasses the members of this hell by stabbing them as they come near him, which splits them in half. Each member is mutilated based on the intensity of their sin. This circle is consistant with Dante's idea that ripping apart a community is worse than ripping apart faith.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

andysays this thread was quite nicely on topick until you started pissing about with dante. i look forward to seeing you in the 8th circle.


----------



## likesfish (Oct 7, 2015)

she is an idiot but when your attacked by somebody involved with fucking gamergate who is apparently over 15


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

The wrathful fight each other on the surface of the Styx - and then get put on Forced Ignore.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> The wrathful fight each other on the surface of the Styx - and then get put on Forced Ignore.


i do hope so


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i do hope so


Who said that??


----------



## the button (Oct 7, 2015)

First they came for the people who occasionally say stupid things on the internet, but I did nothing beca.... oh bollocks


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> andysays this thread was quite nicely on topick until you started pissing about with dante. i look forward to seeing you in the 8th circle.



Looks like the two of us will be hunkered down together in the 9th bolgia then, along with Muhammed, Pier Dia Medicina and Bertand De Born.

I wonder if either Bahar Mustapha or Andy Keane will put in an appearance.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you say you didn't mean it as a nationality _now._ but you could have said that earlier, if that's what you actually meant, and saved everyone a great deal of trouble. but as you didn't i don't think you're being absolutely honest here


Oh fuck off, you're the dishonest one here. Your motives are nothing but dishonourable.


----------



## treelover (Oct 7, 2015)

Feminist protesters storm red carpet at London premiere of Suffragette

Apparently Sisters Uncut have been protesting at the 'Suffragette' Premiere and crazily voting it down on IMDB as racist, way to go, undermine a film that supports your cause, we seem to be back to the 80's.

Guardian has put it on its front page.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2015)

perhaps they have a point.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 7, 2015)

Women shouldn't protest at the premiere of a film about suffragettes, that would be inappropriate.

Wait a moment


----------



## the button (Oct 7, 2015)

Crazily protesting cuts to domestic violence services.

Birds, eh?


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)

Ruining a film that supports them!


----------



## the button (Oct 7, 2015)

I understand that some of the gays didn't appreciate the film Stonewall's portrayal of the riot as being initiated by straight-acting white guys rather than black drag queens either.

There's no pleasing some people.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)

V for Vendetta didn't fill its quota of spotty social inadequates from 4chan. If that's what it was about.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 7, 2015)

treelover said:


> Feminist protesters storm red carpet at London premiere of Suffragette
> 
> Apparently Sisters Uncut have been protesting at the 'Suffragette' Premiere and crazily voting it down on IMDB as racist, way to go, undermine a film that supports your cause, we seem to be back to the 80's.
> 
> Guardian has put it on its front page.



Funny I was just about to start a thread for Sisters Uncut...THEY DESERVE THEIR OWN THREAD!

They are not undermining their own cause...think deeply now...a culture that _seemingly _celebrates the feminist movement and glorifies a film about the Suffragettes with RED CARPET AND ALL  is a perfect platform to highlight inconsistencies and hypocrisy.... ffs!



> Asked why the protesters chose to target a film seemingly supportive of their feminist stance, Latifa said: “This film is talking about women’s liberation in a very celebratory sense and there’s this argument that we’re in a post-feminist era so that means that our messages more than ever need to heard because there is this delusional element to it all.”


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2015)

Although giving them their own thread will just end up being about the Clapton Ultras again.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 7, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> V for Vendetta didn't fill its quota of spotty social inadequates from 4chan. If that's what it was about.


that was actually post hoc appropriated by the neckbeard fraternity after the hollywood translation of the comic ripped the heart out of the story and presented it as a liberal wet dream about an authoritarian regime they would totally sleepwalk into. US anarcho outfit Crimethinc tabled the openings to highlight this. Original author wrote that it was a horrible US liberal rework of his tale. I met the original author in the shop buying beer and he said the film was bollocks as well.
Read the comic.


----------



## stethoscope (Oct 7, 2015)

treelover said:


> Apparently Sisters Uncut have been protesting at the 'Suffragette' Premiere and crazily voting it down on IMDB as racist, way to go, undermine a film that supports your cause, we seem to be back to the 80's.



Given that red carpet/premiere events mostly seem to concentrate on leading female looks and who made their dress, and that the film is about the Sufragettes, I'd say it was the ideal platform to protest about gender inequality, DV, etc.

Not seen the film, but I suspect it  will rather glamourise some of women's lib for the Hollywood market tbh.

As for going back to the 80's, yes we are. But not for that reason you cock.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

_Stop it! Stop protesting!  If you don't let Helena Bonham Carter present your struggle, how the hell can you get your message across??_


----------



## the button (Oct 7, 2015)

H! H! HBC!


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

_If it wasn't for Meryl Streep, women would have very little idea about the pay gap. _


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2015)

Anyway, I've not been killed today (not that any of you were worried ).  The rest of you lads out there, stay safe, stay vigilant.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Anyway, I've not been killed today (not that any of you were worried ).  The rest of you lads out there, stay safe, stay vigilant.


glad to hear yr well 

e2a: Bungle73 i've still not been run down by a bus


----------



## Wilf (Oct 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> glad to hear yr well


Just living day to day.  Trying to get back to the person I was before the Fatwa was issued.


----------



## belboid (Oct 8, 2015)

treelover said:


> Feminist protesters storm red carpet at London premiere of Suffragette
> 
> Apparently Sisters Uncut have been protesting at the 'Suffragette' Premiere and crazily voting it down on IMDB as racist, way to go, undermine a film that supports your cause, we seem to be back to the 80's.
> 
> Guardian has put it on its front page.


imbeciles!  Making a protest that all the female cast members present, uhh, supported

(or at least pretended to)


----------



## J Ed (Oct 8, 2015)

I think that their criticisms of the film are bizarre but their highlighting of the juxtaposition of the Hollywood monetisation of feminism while the cuts attack women in particular is spot on.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> I think that their criticisms of the film are bizarre .



Can you expand on this please?


----------



## J Ed (Oct 8, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Can you expand on this please?



Yeah, okay. Maybe there is something I am not understanding here but I don't have any problem with the use of the slogan 'I'd rather be a rebel than a slave' in a film about Emmeline Pankhurst since she actually said it and she said it at a time when women were absolutely completely in a position of social, economic and political subordination to men. Yes, the position of women in early 20th Century Britain was not equivalent to chattel slavery as experienced by the African diaspora in the Americas but the word 'slave' encompasses and historically has encompassed many more definitions than that. I am also sceptical of exactly where the criticism is coming from given that one of the originators of the backlash against the use of the slogan is Deray McKesson who seems to spend his time alternating between co-opting the Black Lives Matter movement and promoting privatisations (especially in education) which particularly disadvantage black working-class Americans. I regard people like him as basically spending an awful lot of their time finding identity politics culture war issues that they can eventually mask their neoliberal policies in a way that appears legitimate to left or liberal audiences that would otherwise be critical of those neoliberal policies.

As I understand it the other main issue taken with the film is that it is too white, but Emmeline Pankhurst lived and operated within a world that was overwhelming white and she was a supporter of a racial politics which I and I'm sure almost everyone on this forum would be against. The Guardian article I linked to repeats the claim that the film whitewashes the historical narrative, and then by making a second claim which is actually accurate "However compelled one is to whitewash a historical narrative – *or to choose narratives that are majority white to convert into Hollywood films*" it invalidates the original claim!

Of course none of this means I'm not completely in favour of protests against cuts to DV groups at the premiere of this film or frankly anywhere else, but these are my reasons for finding the criticisms of the film bizarre.


----------



## Mation (Oct 8, 2015)

The problem J Ed , or one of them - I've not seen the film - isn't that it's a real quote or that it's in the film, but that it is now being used as the slogan. Why didn't anyone involved think about what black people might feel about this now? Why doesn't it matter?


----------



## Mation (Oct 8, 2015)

How do you tag someone with a space in their name?


----------



## belboid (Oct 8, 2015)

Mation said:


> How do you tag someone with a space in their name?


same as usual, include the space and it should just pop up


----------



## fishfinger (Oct 8, 2015)

Mation said:


> How do you tag someone with a space in their name?


You mean like J Ed ? If so, then type the at symbol followed by j ed

Edit: me too slow


----------



## Mation (Oct 8, 2015)

belboid said:


> same as usual, include the space and it should just pop up


Ta


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2015)

Mation said:


> The problem J Ed , or one of them - I've not seen the film - isn't that its a real quote or that its in the film, but that it now being used as the slogan. Why didn't anyone involved think about what black people might feel about this now? Why doesn't it matter?



Can you clarify what you mean? How do you know whether the film makers did or didn't think about what black people might think? What are you suggesting black people might think (and do you mean all black people or just some) and should the fact that black people might think a particular thing about the use of this slogan with a historically specific context mean that the film makers shouldn't use it and if so why?

I appreciate that I'm bombarding you with questions, but your question to J Ed seems to me to beg those questions


----------



## comrade spurski (Oct 8, 2015)

treelover said:


> Feminist protesters storm red carpet at London premiere of Suffragette
> 
> Apparently Sisters Uncut have been protesting at the 'Suffragette' Premiere and crazily voting it down on IMDB as racist, way to go, undermine a film that supports your cause, we seem to be back to the 80's.
> 
> Guardian has put it on its front page.



Started poorly, went down a bit  and ended badly...apart from that, great post


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

How many of the suffragettes were from ethnic minorities? I'm not aware of any, and that isn't through lack of trying to find out. and the only ethnic minority British suffragist i'm aware of is Sophia Dulep Singh.

and i've put the book about her on my reading list. i've been hoping someone would write that one for a while now.


----------



## belboid (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> How many of the suffragettes were from ethnic minorities? I'm not aware of any, and that isn't through lack of trying to find out. and the only ethnic minority British suffragist i'm aware of is Sophia Dulep Singh.
> 
> and i've put the book about her on my reading list. i've been hoping someone would write that one for a while now.


There were some, mostly of Indian origin, allying to a similar movement in India. Most notable was a woman called Sophia Duleep Singh.
What did the suffragette movement in Britain really look like?


----------



## comrade spurski (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> How many of the suffragettes were from ethnic minorities? I'm not aware of any, and that isn't through lack of trying to find out. and the only ethnic minority British suffragist i'm aware of is Sophia Dulep Singh.



How many black women were:
A) encouraged and able to join ?
B) were recognised as members ?


----------



## J Ed (Oct 8, 2015)

Mation said:


> The problem J Ed , or one of them - I've not seen the film - isn't that its a real quote or that its in the film, but that it now being used as the slogan. Why didn't anyone involved think about what black people might feel about this now? Why doesn't it matter?



I don't know, I am not about to assume anything about the intentions of others on this but if I were asked whether that slogan could be considered offensive by black people or anyone else I would say no. Actually it's only just occurred to me that there is an extra dimension to it in a US context (or intersectional, by extension), I think that there are people who are interpreting or who are saying that it could be interpreted as meaning "I'd rather be a [Confederate] rebel than a [black] slave". That interpretation has been mentioned here and in plenty of other articles and now frankly I think that the criticisms of the slogan are even more bizarre, sorry but not everything is about America and this film is about the British suffragettes not the US Civil War.


----------



## Belushi (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> How many of the suffragettes were from ethnic minorities? I'm not aware of any, and that isn't through lack of trying to find out. and the only ethnic minority British suffragist i'm aware of is Sophia Dulep Singh.
> 
> and i've put the book about her on my reading list. i've been hoping someone would write that one for a while now.



I saw a picture yesterday of some Indian suffragettes on a march in London, I'll see if I can locate it.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

belboid said:


> There were some, mostly of Indian origin, allying to a similar movement in India. Most notable was a woman called Sophia Duleep Singh.
> What did the suffragette movement in Britain really look like?



ah, she was a suffragette then.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

Belushi said:


> I saw a picture yesterday of some Indian suffragettes on a march in London, I'll see if I can locate it.



id seen the pictures of Singh before, but not a lot else. 

and i suspected there was more because of the longstanding links between some of the British and Indian reformers.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 8, 2015)

_They took her fathers kingdom and all they gave her back was beings the queens god-daughter_. 

Ladies not women.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

comrade spurski said:


> How many black women were:
> A) encouraged and able to join ?
> B) were recognised as members ?



i don't know. that's why i was asking. because i've looked for answers to this before and not found it being discussed in a UK context.

I know the story in the UK was different to the US. a smaller black population and there isn't an evidenced history of deliberate exclusion here. I do know that the Indian woman mentioned above was upper class, some of the stories I managed to find name her as a princess. but also that the suffragettes in particular did admit working class women and women from less respectful professions in a way that was scandalous at the time. and that were black women involved, there may be no mention that they were black, unless they did something notorious enough that it was acceptable to breach normal manners and mention their race. (yes, this was true at the time, not my projection of modern attitudes)


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 8, 2015)

How about a film about Sylvia Pankhurst and Haile Selassie?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 8, 2015)

Why not - after the film about her and the workers dreadnought. And being expelled by her racist suffragette comrades.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 8, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Why not - after the film about her and the workers dreadnought. And being expelled by here racist suffragette comrades.



Battleship Pankhurst


----------



## comrade spurski (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> i don't know. that's why i was asking. because i've looked for answers to this before and not found it being discussed in a UK context.
> 
> I know the story in the UK was different to the US. a smaller black population and there isn't an evidenced history of deliberate exclusion here. I do know that the Indian woman mentioned above was upper class, some of the stories I managed to find name her as a princess. but also that the suffragettes in particular did admit working class women and women from less respectful professions in a way that was scandalous at the time. and that were black women involved, there may be no mention that they were black, unless they did something notorious enough that it was acceptable to breach normal manners and mention their race. (yes, this was true at the time, not my projection of modern attitudes)


Sorry mate...wasn't questioning you horribly...was hoping you might know the answers as you seemed to have a lot more knowledge of it than me.


----------



## Mation (Oct 8, 2015)

andysays said:


> Can you clarify what you mean? How do you know whether the film makers did or didn't think about what black people might think? What are you suggesting black people might think (and do you mean all black people or just some) and should the fact that black people might think a particular thing about the use of this slogan with a historically specific context mean that the film makers shouldn't use it and if so why?
> 
> I appreciate that I'm bombarding you with questions, but your question to J Ed seems to me to beg those questions





J Ed said:


> I don't know, I am not about to assume anything about the intentions of others on this but if I were asked whether that slogan could be considered offensive by black people or anyone else I would say no. Actually it's only just occurred to me that there is an extra dimension to it in a US context (or intersectional, by extension), I think that there are people who are interpreting or who are saying that it could be interpreted as meaning "I'd rather be a [Confederate] rebel than a [black] slave". That interpretation has been mentioned here and in plenty of other articles and now frankly I think that the criticisms of the slogan are even more bizarre, sorry but not everything is about America and this film is about the British suffragettes not the US Civil War.



Who had a choice about being a slave?

Would black people rather have been slaves?

Is the intended audience for the film only white British people who don't find the slogan offensive?

Is it ok to say, fuck it, we don't care if this is insensitive? When? Who is doing the deciding and who might find it offensive?

It is important what stories people chose to tell, and not just what but how. What's included and what's left out. What is ok to leave out because otherwise there won't be a neat story in the eyes of the film-maker.

I don't have a problem with telling this particular woman's story (though, again, I haven't seen the film, I might have a problem with how). I'd be glad of a story that wasn't _just_ about the white women. I'm sure a 'neat' one could have been put together if the film-maker was concerned about telling the story of the whole movement and about how the film might be received if it only told the story of the white suffragettes. It's not a given that a story centred on Emmeline Pankhurst must exclude Indian suffragettes. It's a choice. The same sort of choice that is made again and again. Many people, black and white, notice and care. 

Why doesn't that matter?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 8, 2015)

Nothing new is it? Limited focus on the more palatable parts of history (even when it is about unpalatable women's suffrage ), and the more palatable views/position of those being celebrated...Damn right there was a choice by the film makers. Equally Sisters Uncut made the right choice to protest this IMO.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 8, 2015)

Mation said:


> Who had a choice about being a slave?
> 
> Would black people rather have been slaves?



I don't think that the rather bit in the slogan is that bad, while no one chooses to be a slave there were times and circumstances in which slaves did escape slavery and eventually destroy the institution, and again I don't think that the word 'slave' _has to _refer to chattel slavery. B



> Is the intended audience for the film only white British people who don't find the slogan offensive?



I would guess not but I think that it would be hard to account for the sensitivities of people in every single culture in every country whether their sensitivities are based in reality or misconceptions.



> Is it ok to say, fuck it, we don't care if this is insensitive? When? Who is doing the deciding and who might find it offensive?
> 
> It is important what stories people chose to tell, and not just what but how. What's included and what's left out. What is ok to leave out because otherwise there won't be a neat story in the eyes of the film-maker.
> 
> I don't have a problem with telling this particular woman's story (though, again, I haven't seen the film, I might have a problem with how). I'd be glad of a story that wasn't _just_ about the white women. I'm sure a 'neat' one could have been put together if the film-maker was concerned about telling the story of the whole movement and about how the film might be received if it only told the story of the white suffragettes. It's not a given that a story centred on Emmeline Pankhurst must exclude Indian suffragettes. It's a choice. The same sort of choice that is made again and again. Many people, black and white, notice and care.



I agree with this, it's worth pointing out that the Screenwriter for Suffragette was also responsible for the Iron Lady. Emmeline Pankhurst is a perfect feminist for the ruling class today - she was anti-Communist, an imperialist and classist so there is little that needs to be done to make her acceptable for conservative sensibilities today. It is not really surprising that we are seeing a film centred around her rather than, for example, Emma Goldman or Rosa Luxemburg.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> It's worth pointing out that the Screenwriter for Suffragette was also responsible for the Iron Lady. *Emmeline Pankhurst is a perfect feminist for the ruling class today* - she was anti-Communist, an imperialist and classist so there is little that needs to be done to make her acceptable for conservative sensibilities today.* It is not really surprising that we are seeing a film centred around her rather than, for example, Emma Goldman or Rosa Luxemburg.*



Or her daughter Sylvia.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Nothing new is it? Limited focus on the more palatable parts of history (even when it is about unpalatable women's suffrage ), and the more palatable views/position of those being celebrated...Damn right there was a choice by the film makers. Equally Sisters Uncut made the right choice to protest this IMO.


Having previous experience of sisters uncut, they are just a bunch of middle class self publicity seeking group with no interest in anything other than self promotion. They are divisive and intersectionalist .I would recommend anyone with true intentions to stay well clear of this group.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Having previous experience of sisters uncut, they are just a bunch of middle class self publicity seeking group with no interest in anything other than self promotion. They are divisive and intersectionalist .I would recommend anyone with true intentions to stay well clear of this group.


that's quite a divisive comment


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Having previous experience of sisters uncut, they are just a bunch of middle class self publicity seeking group with no interest in anything other than self promotion. They are divisive and intersectionalist .I would recommend anyone with true intentions to stay well clear of this group.


true intentions of what?


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> that's quite a divisive comment


Solidarity with all working class women! they are living the real life!


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> true intentions of what?


Go for it big man!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> that's quite a divisive comment


have you thought of putting your name forward to fill the gap left by mango5's departure of modhood?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> have you thought of putting your name forward to fill the gap left by mango5's departure of modhood?


that's rich!
hell no, i just thought it was funny


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Go for it big man!


big men don't come bigger than you.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

comrade spurski said:


> Sorry mate...wasn't questioning you horribly...was hoping you might know the answers as you seemed to have a lot more knowledge of it than me.



part of the problem is that it hasn't been looked at. there was literally nothing until this year when a biog of singh was published. and as much as it looks like we have the role of women in that era is covered, it's still new enough as a field for their to be massive gaps. I spent a while looking for answers to these questions a couple of years ago and even when this went as far as discussing with postcolonial feminist historians, they didn't know either. 

the more we find out, the better. 

but what i do know about many of the women involved in feminism in that era, there's a lot of distinctly unpleasant ideas. fawcett was classist and pro imperialist. bessant believed in some very odd racialist philosophy, stopes in eugenics. as a movement, we want heroes, but our heroes had their bad side and we want heroes who were perfect. criticizing those heroes becomes attacking the movement, because we're used to being under seige from people who do so. in the end, i think that the odd and nasty beliefs of some of the movement's founders are less of a discredit to feminism than refusing to address those beliefs. 

idk if we will find deliberate exclusion or hiding black women, but whatever we find, we need to address. and address the points that sisters uncut are raising how minority women get fucked over and how they are not protected from abuse. and the willingness to accept that multiculturalism means accepting screwing over women (recommend reading Sarah Song - Justice, gender, and the politics of multiculturalism for a look at this, should be compulsory reading for anyone asking why minority women complain feminism fails them)

and for whoever thought up those tshirts - you fucking idiot.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> big men don't come bigger than you.


Big enough to smell a rat! sisters uncut have nothing to do with feminism


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Big enough to smell a rat! sisters uncut have nothing to do with feminism



They do...just not all feminisms.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Tony_LeaS (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Big enough to smell a rat! sisters uncut have nothing to do with feminism



Feminism isnt just a singular group, you get all different kinds of aspects really.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> They do...just not all feminisms.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice[/QUOTE
> I repeat my experiences tell me 100% sisters uncut have nothing to do with feminism


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

Im guessing the original slogan was trying to create a link between feminist campaigns and the anti slavery campaigns. which makes more sence in it's context than it's does now. but to use it now is a long way past being considerate or thoughtful an well into being a fucking ignorant twat


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> sisters uncut have nothing to do with feminism



That's a big claim. How are you deciding who and who doesn't have something/anything to do with feminism?


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

Middle class misandrists. Absolutely nothing to do with feminism and certainly no connection with the working class.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Big enough to smell a rat! sisters uncut have nothing to do with feminism



why do you get to define who is and isn't feminist?

from sisters uncut



> We are a feminist group taking direct action for domestic violence services





> Austerity is killing women. Join us in the fight #deadwomencantvote



what qualifications do you have that makes you better able to define who is and isn't feminist than the women defining themselves as feminist?


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Middle class misandrists. Absolutely nothing to do with feminism and certainly no connection with the working class.



still lacking any evidence.....


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Middle class misandrists. Absolutely nothing to do with feminism and certainly no connection with the working class.



Feminism is only a working class woman's issue? 

Also, can you outline what Feminism is? That way I might be able to understand why you are making such big, blanket statements about what women struggle for and against.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> Im guessing the original slogan was trying to create a link between feminist campaigns and the anti slavery campaigns. which makes more sence in it's context than it's does now. but to use it now is a long way past being considerate or thoughtful an well into being a fucking ignorant twat


The use of the quote is nonsense tbh as is the offense at it. It is clearly meant in the colloquial rhetorical sense of _making a stand_. Any other questions about what the film makers went with should stand apart from that.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> That's a big claim. How are you deciding who and who doesn't have something/anything to do with feminism?


I hope you are nothing to do with them. If not do some research and find out for yourself. Middle class bored spoilt brats, the absolute opposite of any self respecting working class feminist.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> I hope you are nothing to do with them. If not do some research and find out for yourself. Middle class bored spoilt brats, the absolute opposite of any self respecting working class feminist.



i note you're still avoiding answering any questions as to how you're qualified to tell us what is and isn't proper feminism.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Feminism is only a working class woman's issue?
> 
> Also, can you outline what Feminism is? That way I might be able to understand why you are making such big, blanket statements about what women struggle for and against.


Investigate them for yourself and then it is your choice to decide.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> I hope you are nothing to do with them. If not do some research and find out for yourself. Middle class bored spoilt brats, the absolute opposite of any self respecting working class feminist.


I love viz. When  are you first appearing?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> I hope you are nothing to do with them. If not do some research and find out for yourself. Middle class bored spoilt brats, the absolute opposite of any self respecting working class feminist.



Thank you for your unnecessary, condescending advice. Could you answer the questons I asked of you please?


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> i note you're still avoiding answering any questions as to how you're qualified to tell us what is and isn't proper feminism.


Only an opinion. form your own. Get involved with them and find out for yourself.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Investigate them for yourself and then it is your choice to decide.



so the only choice i'm left with is to believe you're spouting off shit that you know nothing about.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Only an opinion. form your own. Get involved with them and find out for yourself.



based on what evidence......


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> so the only choice i'm left with is to believe you're spouting off shit that you know nothing about.


Not at all. If you are too lazy to find out yourself that is up to you. I have plenty of experience of S.U. and that is my conclusion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> based on what evidence......


evidence? he don't need no stinking evidence


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

here's 2 opinions. 

1. the sky is green

2. The Flying Pig talks a load of evidence free bullshit.

one of these opinions can be supported by evidence. one is proper bullshit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Not at all. If you are too lazy to find out yourself that is up to you. I have plenty of experience of S.U. and that is my conclusion.


s.a. you have plenty of experience of s.a. - sod all.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Not at all. If you are too lazy to find out yourself that is up to you. I have plenty of experience of S.U. and that is my conclusion.



and my conclusion is you are talking complete shit.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> based on what evidence......


Investigate and draw your own conclusion.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> and my conclusion is you are talking complete shit.


I will conclude you are just too lazy


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Investigate and draw your own conclusion.



i don't see any reason to investigate these evidence free accusations anymore than I feel the need to go check out the colour of the sky tomorrow.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> s.a. you have plenty of experience of s.a. - sod all.


Haha ! If only you knew. But you don't so keep on twittering


----------



## Athos (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> I have plenty of experience of S.U. and that is my conclusion.


Specifically, what experience drove you to that conclusion?


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

if you think there is something worthy of investigation, then you would provide evidence to that effect. a refusal to provide anything suggests either personal beef or trolling.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Haha ! If only you knew. But you don't so keep on twittering


enlighten me


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> i don't see any reason to investigate these evidence free accusations anymore than I feel the need to go check out the colour of the sky tomorrow.


Sums up my thoughts on you. too lazy. Some of us working people have no choice but to check the weather daily. For we work outside and the elements decide whether we can work or not. Obviously something you are not familiar with.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 8, 2015)

So anyway to go back to the topic, has anyone else noticed how many supposed right-wing 'libertarian' free speech absolutists who were thrilled to defend the speech rights of neo-Nazis and so on are willing to make an exception for Bahar Mustafa?


----------



## J Ed (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Sums up my thoughts on you. too lazy. Some of us working people have no choice but to check the weather daily. For we work outside and the elements decide whether we can work or not. Obviously something you are not familiar with.



wtf


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> if you think there is something worthy of investigation, then you would provide evidence to that effect. a refusal to provide anything suggests either personal beef or trolling.


Think what you want. I am not giving away my hard worked on knowledge to someone who just wants to ridicule. The information I assure you is out there.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> wtf


Sums you up. Never had to work outside?


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Think what you want. I am not giving away my hard worked on knowledge to someone who just wants to ridicule. The information I assure you is out there.



and i've found nothing to convince me that this is anyhting other than you wanting to throw some bullshit about


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Think what you want. I am not giving away my hard worked on knowledge to someone who just wants to ridicule. The information I assure you is out there.



But you give us your conclusions for free?  Generous.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Sums you up. Never had to work outside?



Yes, and while I was moving boxes around in a walk in freezer last night I recalled doing so fondly.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

I have no academic qualifications but I know what happens on the street, I really do feel some of you need to open your eyes and get out in the real world more often. Draw your own conclusions, I now really don't care what they are but get off your backsides so you are better informed.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> wtf



i think we've got to prove credentials before being allowed to join discussion.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Yes, and while I was moving boxes around in a walk in freezer last night I recalled doing so fondly.


It is alright for the rich having a walk in freezer.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Yes, and while I was moving boxes around in a walk in freezer last night I recalled doing so fondly.



as do i every time I get to clean up puke in the morning


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> i think we've got to prove credentials before being allowed to join discussion.


Don't think just get up and go outside


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> I have no academic qualifications but I know what happens on the street, I really do feel some of you need to open your eyes and get out in the real world more often. Draw your own conclusions, I now really don't care what they are but get off your backsides so you are better informed.


It's not the street - it's the cobbles. 

You have fish in hair from working the trawlers as well.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

toggle said:


> as do i every time I get to clean up puke in the morning


Juvenile remark


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Think what you want. I am not giving away my hard worked on knowledge to someone who just wants to ridicule. The information I assure you is out there.


pisspoor


----------



## The Flying Pig (Oct 8, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> It's not the street - it's the cobbles.
> 
> You have fish in hair from working the trawlers as well.


Not a bad guess actually


----------



## J Ed (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> It is alright for the rich having a walk in freezer.



You would think so but I just cannot find the freezer space for all the pheasants I've shot, it really is a bit of a chore


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> I have no academic qualifications but I know what happens on the street, I really do feel some of you need to open your eyes and get out in the real world more often. Draw your own conclusions, I now really don't care what they are but get off your backsides so you are better informed.


but do you know what goes on in buildings?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Not a bad guess actually


Yeah. Right. You're trying too hard. The real w/c can see it a mile off.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> You would think so but I just cannot find the freezer space for all the pheasants I've shot, it really is a bit of a chore


peasants. room for all the peasants you've shot.


----------



## Athos (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> I have no academic qualifications but I know what happens on the street...



Sesame Street?


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Juvenile remark



oh.

so you want to ridicule someone who cleans loos for a club to pay their bills?

nice going there comrade


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

Athos said:


> Sesame Street?


*coronation* street


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Sums up my thoughts on you. too lazy. Some of us working people have no choice but to check the weather daily. For we work outside and the elements decide whether we can work or not. Obviously something you are not familiar with.


have you ever considered buying a waterproof coat?


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 8, 2015)

I don't even know why working outside is a bad thing. Totally dependant on the weather and what you're doing. Working inside can be more of a cunt in the blistering heat and the jobsworths are enforcing full PPE than a little bit of rain when you're doing a spot of gardening.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I don't even know why working outside is a bad thing. Totally dependant on the weather and what you're doing. Working inside can be more of a cunt in the blistering heat and the jobsworths are enforcing full PPE than a little bit of rain when you're doing a spot of gardening.



depends where though. full kit and 'can i have some more kit' and where did they hide the bigger boots so I can fit a 4th pair of socks in them do well for the working in the giant fridge


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

wheras - thank fuck the boss never walks out of his office and bothers caring about ppe works best when spending a summer lugging heavy boxes about, including off vans and into smelly fields (can i have a peg please). except to turn up late and ask why the entre car park looks recently flooded because we were more interested in having a waterfight than doing anyhtng to make the rich arrogant  cunt richer

eta, and fuck me if he isn't my nominated candidate for first against the wall.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Sums you up. Never had to work outside?





> I was a miner, I was a docker
> I was a ram-raider between the wars


----------



## Bakunin (Oct 8, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> But you give us your conclusions for free?  Generous.



You see, Penny Dreadful was wrong.

We CAN have nice things.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Sums up my thoughts on you. too lazy. Some of us working people have no choice but to check the weather daily. For we work outside and the elements decide whether we can work or not. Obviously something you are not familiar with.


You're about as working class as Cameron's pork-scented penis, you mug. 
Heard the phrase "protests too much"? That's you - someone who gives it out about their class all the fucking time, because they're a phoney.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> It's not the street - it's the cobbles.
> 
> You have fish in hair from working the trawlers as well.



It just smells like fish.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> You would think so but I just cannot find the freezer space for all the peasants I've shot, it really is a bit of a chore



Corrected that for you, Lord Snooty!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I don't even know why working outside is a bad thing. Totally dependant on the weather and what you're doing. Working inside can be more of a cunt in the blistering heat and the jobsworths are enforcing full PPE than a little bit of rain when you're doing a spot of gardening.


Worst place for horrible conditions I ever worked was a covered market. Bollock-freezingly cold in the winter, and the glass roof made it sweaty as fuck if the sun was out. Worst of both worlds.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 8, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Worst place for horrible conditions I ever worked was a covered market. Bollock-freezingly cold in the winter, and the glass roof made it sweaty as fuck if the sun was out. Worst of both worlds.



Worst for both for me was working on top of a running furnace in the middle of winter. After 30 mins you had to get the fuck off as the heat became unbearable and then the fucking wind would catch the sweat on your back! 

Anyway, I'm not playing prolier than thou and I left the North long ago for an easier life.


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

i just go back to accounts from 19th century miners every time i feel hard done by.

have a 2 hour climb down before you get to your workplace, that was probably as hot as working on that furnace, with shit ventilation and low oxygen levels, chest deep 'water', that is full of the shit of the people working on levels above, hookworm infestation that became known as 'miners anaemia', malaria carrying mossies breeding in the stagnant ponds round the surface and silicoisis. and how long does it take to climb up after 10 hours down there before walking several miles home.and quite probably issues from the radon gas, as well, although that wasn't known about at the time

i'll take those loos anyday


----------



## two sheds (Oct 8, 2015)

6 days a week and Sunday was Chapel


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

two sheds said:


> 6 days a week and Sunday was Chapel



or building the chapel. 

and writing tedious poetry.


----------



## Chick Webb (Oct 8, 2015)

treelover said:


> Feminist protesters storm red carpet at London premiere of Suffragette
> 
> Apparently Sisters Uncut have been protesting at the 'Suffragette' Premiere and crazily voting it down on IMDB as racist, way to go, undermine a film that supports your cause, we seem to be back to the 80's.
> 
> Guardian has put it on its front page.


My sister who is only barely political was complaining about that flick today for ignoring lesbianism and suffragettes of colour.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

Chick Webb said:


> My sister who is only barely political was complaining about that flick today for ignoring lesbianism and suffragettes of colour.


not barely political then


----------



## Chick Webb (Oct 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> not barely political then


She's becoming political. I think she's becoming a trot though.


----------



## cesare (Oct 8, 2015)

Chick Webb said:


> She's becoming political. I think she's becoming a trot though.


Put an icepick in her hall as a deterrent.


----------



## Chick Webb (Oct 8, 2015)

cesare said:


> Put an icepick in her hall as a deterrent.


I do icepick and gulag jokes with her all the time.  They're getting old.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

Chick Webb said:


> She's becoming political. I think she's becoming a trot though.


but when she emerges from the coccoon of trottery she will soar


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2015)

Chick Webb said:


> I do icepick and gulag jokes with her all the time.  They're getting old.


learn some new ones


----------



## Chick Webb (Oct 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> learn some new ones


----------



## toggle (Oct 8, 2015)

a quick look at sisters uncut. 



> *No more cuts to domestic violence services*
> 
> *Restore funding that has been cut*
> 
> ...



not finding the problem. unless our ranter has a problem with the idea that needing protection from sustained campaigns of control and abuse is a need that is felt disproportionately by women.


----------



## Santino (Oct 9, 2015)

'Misandrists' was a bit of a clue I think.


----------



## toggle (Oct 9, 2015)

Santino said:


> 'Misandrists' was a bit of a clue I think.



oh yes, but i was hoping they would hang themselves a little further.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 9, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Sums up my thoughts on you. too lazy. Some of us working people have no choice but to check the weather daily. For we work outside and the elements decide whether we can work or not. Obviously something you are not familiar with.


 
Now this is a *really* weird one.


----------



## andysays (Oct 9, 2015)

toggle said:


> oh yes, but i was hoping they would hang themselves a little further.



He's already tied himself in knots on a previous thread trying to assert his authentic PFWC credentials, including dismissing everyone not like him as middle class wankers, although he seemed to go a little shy when pressed on some of the details of his constructed persona.

I think his response to you above was merely the cherry on the artfully iced British Bake Off-sponsored cake


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2015)

toggle said:


> oh yes, but i was hoping they would hang themselves a little further.


i look forward to yer man doing the tyburn jig


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

Charges dropped - #killallwhitemen row: charges dropped against student diversity officer


----------



## gosub (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> Charges dropped - #killallwhitemen row: charges dropped against student diversity officer



Right decision.  But I still think the students of Goldsmiths are crazy for keeping her in that role.


----------



## JimW (Nov 3, 2015)

Was that based on the discovery that the vast majority of white men have somehow struggled through this crisis unscathed? Can we emerge from the bunkers yet?


----------



## Nigel (Nov 3, 2015)

Dowie said:


> you could say that about Turks or Irish people or travelers too... though I think 'taffs' have more claim to being an ethnic group that scousers. Separate country, language etc..
> 
> I'm still not clear on why 'Welsh' being an ethnicity is a problem? Would you consider Irish to be an ethnicity?


With regards 'Turks', no one appears to question or make a big deal about the phrase Toerag. Obviously a racit slur against thm and people considered of Arab origin !
Toerag « The Word Detective
Could the reason for tis be a hierarchy of preference within racial/ethnic groups ?
toerag


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2015)

you go first Jim and take the gieger counter with you


----------



## Dowie (Nov 3, 2015)

Nigel said:


> With regards 'Turks', no one appears to question or make a big deal about the phrase Toerag. Obviously a racit slur against thm and people considered of Arab origin !
> Toerag « The Word Detective
> Could the reason for tis be a hierarchy of preference within racial/ethnic groups ?
> toerag


?
I'm not sure toerag is 'obviously' a racial slur - it doesn't seem to be clear at all


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

Many insults with racial roots are short of their meaning in modern usage, toerag being one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2015)

Dowie said:


> ?
> I'm not sure toerag is 'obviously' a racial slur - it doesn't seem to be clear at all


bit like wank being a village in austria.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 3, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> bit like wank being a village in austria.



It must be a very relaxed place


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2015)

J Ed said:


> It must be a very relaxed place


my mistake - the austrian village was fucking and the swiss had wank.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> Many insults with racial roots are short of their meaning in modern usage, toerag being one.


except, the origin of toerag is not at all racial


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2015)




----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> except, the origin of toerag is not at all racial


Yes, I just read the comments.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2015)

I never saw toerag as in any way racial. I just thought it meant someone who is akin to the rag you'd put between your sweaty toes when wearing horrible boots.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 3, 2015)

JimW said:


> Was that based on the discovery that the vast majority of white men have somehow struggled through this crisis unscathed? Can we emerge from the bunkers yet?


Can't be nice for a lot of the people trying to study there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I never saw toerag as in any way racial. I just thought it meant someone who is akin to the rag you'd put between your sweaty toes when wearing horrible boots.


more the sort of thing you'd associate with russians.


----------



## JimW (Nov 3, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Can't be nice for a lot of the people trying to study there.


I think we've agreed it was a stupid thing to say but obviously didn't deserve to be taken to law.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2015)

JimW said:


> I think we've agreed it was a stupid thing to say but obviously didn't deserve to be taken to law.


yeh will no one think of the lawyers?


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Can't be nice for a lot of the people trying to study there.


lol


----------



## Fingers (Nov 3, 2015)

I didn't want to see this go to court but I am struggling to work out how her position within her role is tenable.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

Fingers said:


> I didn't want to see this go to court but I am struggling to work out how her position within her role is tenable.


mauybe because the vast majority of students couldn't give a shit, and/or recognised the complaint as a ridiculous bit of witch-hunting.


----------



## Fingers (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> mauybe because the vast majority of students couldn't give a shit, and/or recognised the complaint as a ridiculous bit of witch-hunting.



I would expect a better standard of conduct from a diversity officer myself, otherwise it makes a total mockery of the role.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

the students didn't agree with you


----------



## Fingers (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> the students didn't agree with you



Well maybe I misunderstand what the role of a diversity officer is then.  Perhaps using the official Twitter account for rather unpleasant and narcissistic trolling is part of the job description.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

or maybe they thought the whole thing was a load of bollocks whipped up by dishonest idiots


----------



## TopCat (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> mauybe because the vast majority of students couldn't give a shit, and/or recognised the complaint as a ridiculous bit of witch-hunting.


Maybe they were scared of being attacked by this tool and her stupid acolytes?


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

The percentage of students that would need to vote for a recall is set at such a level that its to all intents and purposes impossible to remove her by that method, when you consider how totally disengaged most students are.

 I dont think you can point to the lack of interest by most of the student body as evidence that she enjoys their support, or that her behaviour is somehow ok.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Maybe they were scared of being attacked by this tool and her stupid acolytes?


lol.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> The percentage of students that would need to vote for a recall is set at such a level that its to all intents and purposes impossible to remove her by that method, when you consider how totally disengaged most students are.
> 
> I dont think you can point to the lack of interest by most of the student body as evidence that she enjoys their support, or that her behaviour is somehow ok.


I dont.  I use it as evidence that they dont give a shit.  3% is pretty tiny, 300 students.  If they cant manage that, then it is clearly a massive fuss over nothing.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> lol.


Is the best you have? Why bother bellend?


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Is the best you have? Why bother bellend?


because you're a misogynist prick, not worth engaging with.


----------



## Fingers (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> because* you're a misogynist prick*, not worth engaging with.



Are you going to explain how you leaped to that bizarre conclusion?


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> I dont.  I use it as evidence that they dont give a shit.  3% is pretty tiny, 300 students.  If they cant manage that, then it is clearly a massive fuss over nothing.


Odd that after all these years, you decide now that the popularity of a position is what gives it authority.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

Fingers said:


> Are you going to explain how you leaped to that bizarre conclusion?


10/15 years of reading his posts


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> Odd that after all these years, you decide now that the popularity of a position is what gives it authority.


eh?  Where have I dont that?  I have repeatedly says that all it shows is that the bast majority of students dont give a shit


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

And therefore its a 'fuss over nothing'


----------



## Fingers (Nov 3, 2015)

.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> And therefore its a 'fuss over nothing'


that appears to be _their _view, yes


----------



## Fingers (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> that appears to be _their _view, yes



Do you think it is a fuss over nothing or do you, like me, think that a diversity officer should be held to higher standards?


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

I think it's an absurd fuss over nothing, built up by idiots and bigots


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

_them's your choices lads, you're with us or you're an idiot or a bigot. probably both._


----------



## Fingers (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> I think it's an absurd fuss over nothing, built up by idiots and bigots



So a male Tweeting stuff like that in the official capacity of a diversity officer would also be acceptable?  I believe in diversity and equality. i think that is where you and me differ somewhat.


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> I dont.  I use it as evidence that they dont give a shit.  3% is pretty tiny, 300 students.  If they cant manage that, then it is clearly a massive fuss over nothing.


where did you get 3% from btw? I read it was a third of the student body earlier in the year.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> where did you get 3% from btw? I read it was a third of the student body earlier in the year.


"a motion of no confidence fell short of the 3% of union members required to trigger a poll." 
#killallwhitemen row: charges dropped against student diversity officer (amongst others)


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> where did you get 3% from btw? I read it was a third of the student body earlier in the year.


yeh. maybe you did. but it was wrong.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

Fingers said:


> So a male Tweeting stuff like that in the official capacity of a diversity officer would also be acceptable?  I believe in diversity and equality. i think that is where you and me differ somewhat.


lol. I would have no problem with a man tweeting #killallwhitemen, no.  And I don't believe there is one person who would be genuinely threatened by it.  Nor by the original offense of asking white men not to go to an event intended for minority ethnic women


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> lol. I would have no problem with a man tweeting #killallwhitemen, no.  And I don't believe there is one person who would be genuinely threatened by it.  Nor by the original offense of asking white men not to go to an event intended for minority ethnic women


wouldn't call it an offence myself.


----------



## Fingers (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> lol. I would have no problem with a man tweeting #killallwhitemen, no.  And I don't believe there is one person who would be genuinely threatened by it.  Nor by the original offense of asking white men not to go to an event intended for minority ethnic women



How about a male diversity officer tweeting #killallwhitewomen


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2015)

Fingers said:


> How about a male diversity officer tweeting #killallwhitewomen


probably go down a treat in some quarters


----------



## TopCat (Nov 3, 2015)

belboid said:


> because you're a misogynist prick, not worth engaging with.


It might be better face to face, we might like each other.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Nov 3, 2015)

Fingers said:


> How about a male diversity officer tweeting #killallwhitewomen



Come on, whatever you think of her that's clearly not the same is it? The context is totally different.


----------



## Fingers (Nov 3, 2015)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Come on, whatever you think of her that's clearly not the same is it? The context is totally different.



Personally I do not think a diversity officer should be using an official Twitter account to Tweet about killing anyone but maybe that is just me.  Maybe I have the wrong idea about what the role of a diversity officer is.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

Fingers said:


> How about a male diversity officer tweeting #killallwhitewomen


I am sure this was all done up the thread. I have never intention of doing it all again. Except to say if you can't see any difference then that's your problem.


----------



## belboid (Nov 3, 2015)

TopCat said:


> It might be better face to face, we might like each other.


Stranger things have happened!


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 3, 2015)

Wasn't this tweeted from her personal account and tweeted not in the capacity of being a diversity officer?

The most pertinent question this raises is not a petulant, off the cuff remark aimed at a certain audience but the mixing of online personas.


----------



## Ole (Nov 3, 2015)

She's obviously an absolute weapon, so it would've been funny if she was sacked. But it's also quite obvious that the petition/complaint as put on change.org was out of order.


----------



## Dowie (Nov 3, 2015)

Fingers said:


> How about a male diversity officer tweeting #killallwhitewomen



he'd be quite obviously 'trolling' as she was too.... change 'kill' to 'rape' and it would probably generate a much bigger shit storm

students do seem to have a knack for doing ridiculous things like this though - on one side there is the various 'lads' 'banter' - every year some sports (usually rugby) team at some university will generate some press headlines because they've said or done something ridiculously stupid - often something derogatory towards women

on the other side we've got this campaigner who has gone way too far and essentially resorted to a mirroring the sort of bigotry she is supposed to be opposed to


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 3, 2015)

Ole said:


> She's obviously an absolute weapon, so it would've been funny if she was sacked.



She seems like a good egg to me. I met her the other week.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 3, 2015)

It's a crass generalisation to assume all white men are alike by virtue of their maleness and whiteness. A diversity officer knows this. Or ought to. I don't find it particularly offensive though. It has no teeth.


----------



## Ole (Nov 3, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> She seems like a good egg to me. I met her the other week.


OK. That doesn't change my impression, to be honest.


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 3, 2015)

Ole said:


> OK. That doesn't change my impression, to be honest.



This is the danger of young people speaking to a niche and then being broadcast to the world.

I've said plenty of disgraceful things on here. Doesn't mean I should have my face and name slapped all over the press.


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 3, 2015)

Here's a Vice interview with Bahar Exclusive: Bahar Mustafa Speaks to VICE After the Police Drop '#KillAllWhiteMen' Charges | VICE | United Kingdom


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 3, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> Here's a Vice interview with Bahar Exclusive: Bahar Mustafa Speaks to VICE After the Police Drop '#KillAllWhiteMen' Charges | VICE | United Kingdom



Oh sweet Jesus the comments!


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 3, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> Oh sweet Jesus the comments!


"Feminists are literally the greatest enemies of feminism"


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 3, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> "Feminists are literally the greatest enemies of feminism"



By "Nathan". I'm sure the world of women are truly grateful for having Nathan explain this to them.


----------



## JimW (Nov 3, 2015)

If they've lost even dear sweet Nathan the women might as well just chuck it all in now


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

Christ on a pony those comments are a whole world of special.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> Christ on a pony those comments are a whole world of special.



I trust you're not alluding to SEN in your 'special' insult


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> Christ on a pony those comments are a whole world of special.




Egalitarianism is a mental illness (created mostly by whites) to satisfy their pathological compassion. The patriarchy is far superior system, meaning that any plea for gender equality is not only unacceptable, it should be punished through public persecution.

I love cows with a ring in their nose...really easy to get hold of and milk.

Benjamin Locksbrook I don't think the bitch deserves my respect...and you certainly don't....your pants are down around your ankles.

t was actually free speech advocates like Gamergate and Breitbart that were sticking up for you. Maybe keep that in mind the next time you want to run your privileged, white cunty mouth about how you're so put upon by society.

Good. It is time to increase patriarchy around the world, especially in first world countries where women have gotten too uppity.

xcluding me simply because I am white and a man is exactly how we've been oppressing women and ethnic minorities, 



wot was that babar Mustafa said in the interview?

oh yeah.


> Like when you say #FML, you aren't literally telling people to fuck your life. It's an expression of how somebody is feeling, not what they are telling people to do. It isn't a command. The #KillAllWhiteMen hashtag is something that a lot of people in the feminist community use to express frustration.




kinda in the #killallmen camp after reading those comments.


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

You're a little new to be hoisting posters on their own petards, MadeInBedlam


----------



## gosub (Nov 3, 2015)

hope for Peter Dow yet


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> I trust you're not alluding to SEN in your 'special' insult


No, which you would know if you have seen any of my previous posts.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

I'm not _that _new. I started posting 3 months ago. I watched the forums for 6 months before that. Had to build up the courage to post. My first was on the care in the uk/disgrace thread. 

I'm not hoisting anyone on their petards or anything else. I asked a straightforward question, in keeping with the subject matter of the thread.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> No, which you would know if you have seen any of my previous posts.



Fair enough


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

what kind of special did you mean then EQ? have to admit, that's the only way I'd understand it used in that context.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> what kind of special did you mean then EQ? have to admit, that's the only way I'd understand it used in that context.



But of course if _I _say that I'm a troll


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

TBF It may well not be a 'retard' comment. Don't see how it's wrong to check it out though.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> I'm not _that _new. I started posting 3 months ago. I watched the forums for 6 months before that. Had to build up the courage to post. My first was on the care in the uk/disgrace thread.
> 
> I'm not hoisting anyone on their petards or anything else. I asked a straightforward question, in keeping with the subject matter of the thread.





killer b said:


> what kind of special did you mean then EQ? have to admit, that's the only way I'd understand it used in that context.


special as in a whole other category of person that thinks being a throwback to the 1970s is OK, worse than 'just' being sexist.


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

I've never heard of that before. Where's it from?


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

i read it as being like special snowflakes. displays of entitlement


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> TBF It may well not be a 'retard' comment. Don't see how it's wrong to check it out though.


 who are you to be questioning my posts? I've been posting for ten years, go and check out my posting record if you think I'm talking about special needs in such an offensive manner.


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

Didn't know that "special" when referring to unusual behaviour was specific to people with learning difficulties


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> special as in a whole other category of person that thinks being a throwback to the 1970s is OK, worse than 'just' being sexist.



Thanks for the clarification.

A bit unsure though why several others thought it odd for me to ask, esp given the often use of 'special' as an insult of those with LD etc. Also find it a bit odd that my 'newness' is seen as a barrier to asking questions of others. The post was ambiguous, I checked for clarity, I got it. What's the problem?


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

cesare said:


> Didn't know that "special" when referring to unusual behaviour was specific to people with learning difficulties



Neither did I. Often used in that way. Worth checking no?


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Neither did I. Often used in that way. Worth checking no?



depends......


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

And yes, I am annoyed at this.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> I watched the forums for 6 months before that.


Now I am imagining you gestating in a giant vat of blue goo like in the sci fi films. A terrible beauty is born.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Nov 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> I've never heard of that before. Where's it from?



I think the word "special" has evolved from being a not so subtle reference to special needs, to meaning all sorts of things from just a bit dim, to having eccentric and out of touch beliefs.  I certainly don't think equation girl was knowingly disparaging people with learning difficulties.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

toggle said:


> depends......



On?

IME discrimination against people with mental disabilities/differences/health issues are the least likely to be challenged and the most likely to rear their head. Would be remiss not to check.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> I've never heard of that before. Where's it from?


Speshul. On the bus. A spas.

thats the derivation.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

Jon-of-arc said:


> I think the word "special" has evolved from being a not so subtle reference to special needs, to meaning all sorts of things from just a bit dim, to having eccentric and out of touch beliefs.  I certainly don't think equation girl was knowingly disparaging people with learning difficulties.



And neither did I, but was concerned, now less so. What's the drama?


----------



## JimW (Nov 3, 2015)

Or managing Chelsea.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2015)

Jon-of-arc said:


> I think the word "special" has evolved from being a not so subtle reference to special needs, to meaning all sorts of things from just a bit dim, to having eccentric and out of touch beliefs.  I certainly don't think equation girl was knowingly disparaging people with learning difficulties.


I don't think it ever evolved from that jon, what do you call a man who can change our very understanding of time and space yet can't sort out wearing his socks? Einstein


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Thanks for the clarification.
> 
> A bit unsure though why several others thought it odd for me to ask, esp given the often use of 'special' as an insult of those with LD etc. Also find it a bit odd that my 'newness' is seen as a barrier to asking questions of others. The post was ambiguous, I checked for clarity, I got it. What's the problem?


EQ is known on the boards for requesting posters are careful what terms they use - it just looked a bit sus someone new jumping on her the second she uses a potentially dodgy term herself.


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Neither did I. Often used in that way. Worth checking no?


Oh you can check, for sure. Whether it's worth it or not depends on the outcome.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Thanks for the clarification.
> 
> A bit unsure though why several others thought it odd for me to ask, esp given the often use of 'special' as an insult of those with LD etc. Also find it a bit odd that my 'newness' is seen as a barrier to asking questions of others. The post was ambiguous, I checked for clarity, I got it. What's the problem?


The problem is that you are new on urban. Whilst each poster has their own style of posting, patterns generally emerge and you could have run a quick search to see if I always use special in the context you assumed. It's not necessarily accepted protocol to hurl loaded questions in such a way.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> And yes, I am annoyed at this.



I'm sorry for the annoyance. No offence intended.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> And neither did I, but was concerned, now less so. What's the drama?



I guess it stems from accusing people who go out of their way to challenge such language when it is used of purposely using it...  I'll take it at face value ou didn't mean to cause offence, but from the other side it might not seem that way?


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

Jon-of-arc said:


> I guess it stems from accusing people who go out of their way to challenge such language when it is used of purposely using it...  I'll take it at face value ou didn't mean to cause offence, but from the other side it might not seem that way?



What accusation?


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> I'm sorry for the annoyance. No offence intended.


 Then I suggest you search a posting history when you feel the urge to do such a check again. Thank you for the apology, appreciated.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Nov 3, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I don't think it ever evolved from that jon, what do you call a man who can change our very understanding of time and space yet can't sort out wearing his socks? Einstein



Maybe you're right - I hear people using it, and don't really think of them as the sort of people who would use the word "spaz" as an insult, but in the hierarchy of offensiveness, it's not quite the same level.  Not worth thinking about too deeply.


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> On?
> 
> IME discrimination against people with mental disabilities/differences/health issues are the least likely to be challenged and the most likely to rear their head. Would be remiss not to check.


Why did you pick your username?


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> What accusation?


others on the forum have been known to make dubious accusations for the lolz,  shall we say.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> What accusation?



Mate, I've only skim-read the thread.  Did you "challenge" rather than accuse?  Is that a better word?  I officially no longer care.


----------



## andysays (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> The problem is that you are new on urban. Whilst each poster has their own style of posting, patterns generally emerge and you could have run a quick search to see if I always use special in the context you assumed. It's not necessarily accepted protocol to hurl loaded questions in such a way.



TBH, I think your reaction here is a little over the top. You were asked a reasonable question, you gave a reasonable answer; end of issue, thread moves on.

It's rather ironic given your tendency at times to jump all over posters for what you consider (reasonably at times) to be offensive use of language and not to accept their word that it wasn't intended offensively, whereas MiB has accepted your word and hasn't laboured the point.

The fact that you've been here for ten years hasn't somehow earned you (or anyone else) the right never to be questioned on anything that might seem possibly off to another poster.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

cesare said:


> Why did you pick your username?



That one kind of answers itself surely. 

Sadly spent most of my life dealing with the consequences of choices made about me by my betters. Including being (illegally) sectioned at 14 and forced to take incontincence inducing medication on the basis of a misdiagnosis


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

TBF I could have phrased it better.

Again, my apologies to EQ.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

Jon-of-arc said:


> Maybe you're right - I hear people using it, and don't really think of them as the sort of people who would use the word "spaz" as an insult, but in the hierarchy of offensiveness, it's not quite the same level.  Not worth thinking about too deeply.



TBH I think the mistreatment of 'special's is thought about not deeply enough. Nowhere near enough.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> others on the forum have been known to make dubious accusations for the lolz,  shall we say.



No lols intended. I don't find the casual dismissal of human beings as subhuman funny. Your post made me feel alert, concerned. Just wanted to check


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

andysays said:


> TBH, I think your reaction here is a little over the top. You were asked a reasonable question, you gave a reasonable answer; end of issue, thread moves on.
> 
> It's rather ironic given your tendency at times to jump all over posters for what you consider (reasonably at times) to be offensive use of language and not to accept their word that it wasn't intended offensively, whereas MiB has accepted your word and hasn't laboured the point.
> 
> The fact that you've been here for ten years hasn't somehow earned you (or anyone else) the right never to be questioned on anything that might seem possibly off to another poster.


Oh please go away.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> That one kind of answers itself surely.
> 
> Sadly spent most of my life dealing with the consequences of choices made about me by my betters. Including being (illegally) sectioned at 14 and forced to take incontincence inducing medication on the basis of a misdiagnosis


sorry to hear this, that sounds really tough to deal with.


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> On?
> 
> IME discrimination against people with mental disabilities/differences/health issues are the least likely to be challenged and the most likely to rear their head. Would be remiss not to check.



it would also be remiss not to consider other options. rather than have a pop at someone due to your own assumptions.


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> That one kind of answers itself surely.
> 
> Sadly spent most of my life dealing with the consequences of choices made about me by my betters. Including being (illegally) sectioned at 14 and forced to take incontincence inducing medication on the basis of a misdiagnosis


You use it in the sense of psychiatric hospital than confusion/pandemonium then.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

cesare said:


> You use it in the sense of psychiatric hospital than confusion/pandemonium then.



There's a difference?


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

toggle said:


> it would also be remiss not to consider other options. rather than have a pop at someone due to your own assumptions.



Oh whatever I've explained it wasn't a pop/accusation whatever.


----------



## andysays (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> Oh please go away.



One rule for you, another rule for everyone else, or at least those who you haven't accepted as being here for long enough yet.

Self-appointed special snowflake status


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

And andysays how many entitled people similar to those commenting on the vice article did you have to interact with today? Were you harassed in the workplace by one or more of them? If so, then you can tell me I'm overreacting.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> That one kind of answers itself surely.
> 
> Sadly spent most of my life dealing with the consequences of choices made about me by my betters. Including being (illegally) sectioned at 14 and forced to take incontincence inducing medication on the basis of a misdiagnosis


thats rough mate, I don't think anyone really knows what the feeling of confinment is till they've done it. You can't leave because the big men will stop you. And they will. And if you get shirty they'll hurt you. At 14, bless your heart thats shite.


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> There's a difference?


I don't think psychiatric hospitals are synonymous with confusion and pandemonium, no.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> And andysays how many entitled people similar to those commenting on the vice article did you have to interact with today? Were you harassed in the workplace by one or more of them? If so, then you can tell me I'm overreacting.



Grim, sorry to hear that


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> who are you to be questioning my posts? I've been posting for ten years, go and check out my posting record if you think I'm talking about special needs in such an offensive manner.


calling seniority is not on!


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

andysays said:


> One rule for you, another rule for everyone else, or at least those who you haven't accepted as being here for long enough yet.
> 
> Self-appointed special snowflake status


I fail to see how you arrive at such a conclusion but whatever. I'm the special entitled snowflake now.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

cesare said:


> I don't think psychiatric hospitals are synonymous with confusion and pandemonium, no.



As a patient they well often are. 

Anyway, you asked me about my name. I've given you an answer. Is this going anywhere?


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

Hey if people are falling over themselves to point out how little seniority I have bring it on (hides grey hairs under hat)


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

Can I be a 'youth' member or something?


Actually no that sounds a bit wrong


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> As a patient they well often are.
> 
> Anyway, you asked me about my name. I've given you an answer. Is this going anywhere?


Worth checking, remiss not to


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Grim, sorry to hear that


Yeah, crap day. Issues with one of the people I work with. *sigh* and thanks. Sorry, I forgot to say thanks.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

cesare said:


> Worth checking, remiss not to



Ok. Good stuff.


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

andysays said:


> One rule for you, another rule for everyone else, or at least those who you haven't accepted as being here for long enough yet.
> 
> Self-appointed special snowflake status





because the situation above could never be interpreted as someone who knows eg objects to ablist comments and has decided to jump on the worst possible interpretation of that comment above and decide to use that to attack her? how often do you deal with that kind of shit?

considering your reaction, i'm going to guess - not often.

lucky you.

meanwhile, other people do. and prefer not to get this kind of shit. 

kinda shit like gamrgaters playing at language they don't properly understand


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

toggle said:


> because the situation above could never be interpreted as someone who knows eg objects to ablist comments and has decided to jump on the worst possible interpretation of that comment above and decide to use that to attack her? how often do you deal with that kind of shit?
> 
> considering your reaction, i'm going to guess - not often.
> 
> ...



Well it could be interpreted like that. Be a bit paranoid though. Admittedly my question was phrased poorly and a bit paranoid in itself.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Hey if people are falling over themselves to point out how little seniority I have bring it on (hides grey hairs under hat)


Just for Men all the way! or maybe some other product from the shop that isn't branded and priced to mug you off. I looked at womens branded razors the other day thinking 'hey maybe I can save two beans by using a lady shaver which is basically the same razor housed in a different form?'

I was wrong.


----------



## andysays (Nov 3, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> And andysays how many entitled people similar to those commenting on the vice article did you have to interact with today? Were you harassed in the workplace by one or more of them? If so, then you can tell me I'm overreacting.



So now you're suggesting that being harassed by people at work means you can later overreact to a perfectly reasonable question here, of the sort which you yourself have asked many times. Would you like to explain how that works?

I merely expressed my opinion, mostly to support MiB who was being attacked by more than just you, and you've chosen not to simply say, OK, two sides to this, other opinions are permissible, but instead to go into full on outrage mode.

You really do yourself no favours  and provide more ammo for those who want to attack you given any opportunity, justified or not (and that doesn't include either me or MiB).


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

There's a programme on Britain's Biggest Sexists in BBC3 atm, btw. Back on topic.


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

If you're including me in #2685 andysays you'd better be clear, eh, cos if you are I'm not letting that pass.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 3, 2015)

andysays said:


> So now you're suggesting that being harassed by people at work means you can later overreact to a perfectly reasonable question here, of the sort which you yourself have asked many times. Would you like to explain how that works?
> 
> I merely expressed my opinion, mostly to support MiB who was being attacked by more than just you, and you've chosen not to simply say, OK, two sides to this, other opinions are permissible, but instead to go into full on outrage mode.
> 
> You really do yourself no favours  and provide more ammo for those who want to attack you given any opportunity, justified or not (and that doesn't include either me or MiB).


you do lay it on a bit thick, you know


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Well it could be interpreted like that. Be a bit paranoid though. Admittedly my question was phrased poorly and a bit paranoid in itself.



not paraniod. 

cause that suggests you think that kind of thing is uncommon. and it isn't. 

lot of the stuff that was aimed at the woman this thread was started about were shades of that kind of silencing.


----------



## andysays (Nov 3, 2015)

cesare said:


> If you're including me in #2685 andysays you'd better be clear, eh, cos if you are I'm not letting that pass.



I thought you wanted to get the thread back on topic.

Sorry, this contrived outrage is all a little too much for me - I'll leave you all to it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2015)

cesare said:


> There's a programme on Britain's Biggest Sexists in BBC3 atm, btw. Back on topic.


I'm at a loss as to understand how you can be the biggest sexist? surely thats MRA people, rapists and them blokes who get the rage cos the judge said they had to pay towards the child


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

toggle said:


> not paraniod.
> 
> cause that suggests you think that kind of thing is uncommon. and it isn't.
> 
> lot of the stuff that was aimed at the woman this thread was started about were shades of that kind of silencing.



Yes well the use of the word 'special' as a means of degrading those who already are dirt in this society isn't exactly a one off (as in rare in society)

TBH everyone can slip into language that demeans others. No-one's above it. Always good to be checked out. I know I benefit from being challenged.


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

andysays said:


> So now you're suggesting that being harassed by people at work means you can later overreact to a perfectly reasonable question here, of the sort which you yourself have asked many times. Would you like to explain how that works?
> 
> I merely expressed my opinion, mostly to support MiB who was being attacked by more than just you, and you've chosen not to simply say, OK, two sides to this, other opinions are permissible, but instead to go into full on outrage mode.
> 
> You really do yourself no favours  and provide more ammo for those who want to attack you given any opportunity, justified or not (and that doesn't include either me or MiB).



the question reads like entitled silencing.

how much someone experiences that is directly relevant to whether they will interpret the question in that way.

you do yourself no favors displaying your lack of comprehension and empathy in this way. your instance that only your reading of a situation and your responses could be read as reasonable is a massive display of being a complete dick

as for claiming that she's providing ammunition, that's a silencing trick in and of itself. 

so why are you resorting to that kind of shittery?


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

andysays said:


> I thought you wanted to get the thread back on topic.
> 
> Sorry, this contrived outrage is all a little too much for me - I'll leave you all to it.


I did, right up until you decided to have a pop all round.


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

andysays said:


> I thought you wanted to get the thread back on topic.
> 
> Sorry, this contrived outrage is all a little too much for me - I'll leave you all to it.



fucking bingo


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I'm at a loss as to understand how you can be the biggest sexist? surely thats MRA people, rapists and them blokes who get the rage cos the judge said they had to pay towards the child


Maybe they're drawing some kind of ill/non defined distinction between sexists and misogynists?


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Yes well the use of the word 'special' as a means of degrading those who already are dirt in this society isn't exactly a one off (as in rare in society)
> 
> TBH everyone can slip into language that demeans others. No-one's above it. Always good to be checked out. I know I benefit from being challenged.



which is the difference between your question than by the responses to the dialog between you and eg.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

toggle said:


> which is the difference between your question than by the responses to the dialog between you and eg.



Sorry i'm lost, either there's a grammatical issue in your statement or i'm not comprehending

And that _isn't _an entitled attack on you


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 3, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I'm at a loss as to understand how you can be the biggest sexist? surely thats MRA people, rapists and them blokes who get the rage cos the judge said they had to pay towards the child


it should be Worst not Biggest!


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2015)

cesare said:


> Maybe they're drawing some kind of ill/non defined distinction between sexists and misogynists?


oh yeah, I could make an argument out of that if I was one who argues without honesty or real feeling. I'm getting the impression everyone on this show deserves the salt mines just by thinking about it.


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> oh yeah, I could make an argument out of that if I was one who argues without honesty or real feeling. I'm getting the impression everyone on this show deserves the salt mines just by thinking about it.


Many of those examples - eg sacking pregnant employees - are, fucking sadly, commonplace.


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Sorry i'm lost, either there's a grammatical issue in your statement or i'm not comprehending



you got a convo with eg when you both worked out that you were coming from having objections to the same shit.

andy got called a cunt, for well, being a cunt. because he was trying to pull the stunt that eg has misinterpreted your comment as


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

toggle said:


> you got a convo with eg when you both worked out that you were coming from having objections to the same shit.
> 
> andy got called a cunt, for well, being a cunt. because he was trying to pull the stunt that eg has misinterpreted your comment as



oh.

I'm new to arguing with people on the internet.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> it should be Worst not Biggest!


'In the field of sexism he towers above his rivals, he has crushed his rivals with a virtuoso display of unprosecutable rape, denigrating work colleagues while stealing their work and being a shit to his own nan'


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> oh.
> 
> I'm new to arguing with people on the internet.



you will be assimilated. your distinctiveness shall be added to our own, resistance is futile


----------



## chilango (Nov 3, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> calling seniority is not on!



I don't read that as "calling seniority" but rather at pointing towards a large body of evidence to draw conclusions from.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 3, 2015)

chilango said:


> I don't read that as "calling seniority" but rather at pointing towards a large body of evidence to draw conclusions from.


sure, but a new poster can't be expected to know what a long term poster has posted in the past


----------



## JimW (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> oh.
> 
> I'm new to arguing with people on the internet.


In that case you're probably not aware that it's customary to send me your deposit as a surety against future swear-box fines and other deductions then. You seem quite polite so fifty quid should cover it.


----------



## cesare (Nov 3, 2015)

JimW said:


> In that case you're probably not aware that it's customary to send me your deposit as a surety against future swear-box fines and other deductions then. You seem quite polite so fifty quid should cover it.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

JimW said:


> In that case you're probably not aware that it's customary to send me your deposit as a surety against future swear-box fines and other deductions then. You seem quite polite so fifty quid should cover it.



This is really off-topic








PM your card details (incl. security code etc for sure) and i'll get you 100 to be safe


----------



## chilango (Nov 3, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> sure, but a new poster can't be expected to know what a long term poster has posted in the past



Hence pointing them in the direction of her posting history I guess.

There are things I expect posters to have learned about me from my time on here, that I no longer feel the need to make explicit regularly. I guess new posters might not know those things (that I take as read). Oh well.


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

Never in life has anyone with a firm belief in a given principle ever said anything that undermined that principle. Ever.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> But of course if _I _say that I'm a troll


Mmmmm


----------



## Shechemite (Nov 3, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Mmmmm



tedium


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 3, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> calling seniority is not on!



Hush noob.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 3, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> oh.
> 
> I'm new to arguing with people on the internet.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2015)

andysays said:


> So now you're suggesting that being harassed by people at work means you can later overreact to a perfectly reasonable question here, of the sort which you yourself have asked many times. Would you like to explain how that works?
> 
> I merely expressed my opinion, mostly to support MiB who was being attacked by more than just you, and you've chosen not to simply say, OK, two sides to this, other opinions are permissible, but instead to go into full on outrage mode.
> 
> You really do yourself no favours  and provide more ammo for those who want to attack you given any opportunity, justified or not (and that doesn't include either me or MiB).


I suggest you stop trying to dictate how I react, or even suggesting I am not allowed to react. Shades of 'be a good girl, don't make a scene ' - your attitude is appalling.


----------



## gosub (Nov 4, 2015)

belboid said:


> lol.



You have previously described named disabled students as puppets and sneered at evidence of their grievance, whilst providing none of your own for your alternative narrative at that level .  It works at the external level of that I have no problem, but not at the internal level. You are spinning for a shower of shits with a right-on veneer.


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 4, 2015)

I preferred the shouty commie days of yore than this tedious point scoring.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 4, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> I preferred the shouty commie days of yore than this tedious point scoring.


Then don't post on the thread.


----------



## andysays (Nov 4, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> I suggest you stop trying to dictate how I react, or even suggesting I am not allowed to react. Shades of 'be a good girl, don't make a scene ' - your attitude is appalling.



Fuck off, that's a complete and utter misrepresentation.

I expressed an opinion (clearly stated as an opinion) that I thought you had overreacted, and you immediately came back with


equationgirl said:


> Oh please go away.



I don't doubt you have people telling you how to react or even that you're not allowed to react, and that you're totally sick of it, but that doesn't justify you in assuming that everyone is doing that everywhere and all the time, on the basis of precisely fuck all, and then getting increasingly aggressive and dishonest in your portrayal of what's happened if someone doesn't immediately back down.

That's what's "appalling", in my opinion.


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 4, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> Then don't post on the thread.



Check your privilege.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 4, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> it should be Worst not Biggest!


good to see you displaying your inner pedant


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 4, 2015)

andysays said:


> Fuck off, that's a complete and utter misrepresentation.
> 
> I expressed an opinion (clearly stated as an opinion) that I thought you had overreacted, and you immediately came back with
> 
> ...


why shouldn't she say pls go away? if equationgirl has one fault it is her great courtesy. i'd have told you to go forth and multiply.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> good to see you displaying your inner pedant


Perhaps it should be best, as in best at sexism.
There was a letter in Viz once complaining that Harold Shipman was Britain's Worst Serial Killer when surely he was the best.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 4, 2015)

andysays said:


> Fuck off, that's a complete and utter misrepresentation.
> 
> I expressed an opinion (clearly stated as an opinion) that I thought you had overreacted, and you immediately came back with
> 
> ...


No it isn't a misrepresentation, a misrepresentation would be to call you a raving misogynist. 

your post came across to me and at least one other poster on this thread as I described.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 4, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> Check your privilege.


check yours - you seem to be just wanting to have a dig.


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 4, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> check yours - you seem to be just wanting to have a dig.



I'd like to refer you to point 3

"*3. Responding Poorly When Held Accountable or Challenged*"

10 Common Things Well-Intentioned Allies Do That Are Actually Counterproductive


----------



## cesare (Nov 4, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> I'd like to refer you to point 3
> 
> "*3. Responding Poorly When Held Accountable or Challenged*"
> 
> 10 Common Things Well-Intentioned Allies Do That Are Actually Counterproductive


What privilege is it that you think EQ needs to check? (As far as I know, she's disabled herself so not any ally on that score, also female on a thread about sexism).


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 4, 2015)

cesare said:


> What privilege is it that you think EQ needs to check?



ALL OF THEM


----------



## cesare (Nov 4, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> ALL OF THEM


It's a bit odd to start asking people with the lack of privilege compared to the aggressors to check what they have less of


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 4, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> ALL OF THEM


how often do you check your privilege?


----------



## DrRingDing (Nov 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> how often do you check your privilege?



Every morning in the shower.


----------



## jimmer (Nov 4, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> Wasn't this tweeted from her personal account and tweeted not in the capacity of being a diversity officer?


It wasn't tweeted at all, whoever has run crying to the Met hasn't even seen a tweet. It's politically motivated harassment by the complainant.

I'm kind of surprised the CPS are even letting the complainant request a review of the decision to drop the case under the Victim’s Right to Review Scheme.

CPS to review decision to drop charges in Mustafa 'racist' tweet row


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 4, 2015)

cesare said:


> It's a bit odd to start asking people with the lack of privilege compared to the aggressors to check what they have less of



It was an ill advised attempt at humour I think.


----------



## cesare (Nov 4, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It was an ill advised attempt at humour I think.


Cheeky bantz


----------



## trabuquera (Nov 4, 2015)

#privbantz


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2015)

belboid said:


> lol. I would have no problem with a man tweeting #killallwhitemen, no.  And I don't believe there is one person who would be genuinely threatened by it.  Nor by the original offense of asking white men not to go to an event intended for minority ethnic women



Stick your American spelling of "offence" up your shitpipe,Yankee-lover!


----------



## belboid (Nov 4, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Stick your American spelling of "offence" up your shitpipe,Yankee-lover!


spell check error??


Okay, no


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> Check your privilege.



Intersectionalist ringpiece!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2015)

belboid said:


> spell check error??
> 
> 
> Okay, no



Only if you're insane enough to have downloaded the American English dictionary to your spell-checker.

That way lies madness!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2015)

andysays said:


> Fuck off, that's a complete and utter misrepresentation.
> 
> I expressed an opinion (clearly stated as an opinion) that I thought you had overreacted, and you immediately came back with
> 
> ...



Andy, you need to proof-read what you post. Sometimes you come across like you're pronouncing on people from on high. It's not edifying.

BTW, have you noted how your paragraph starting "I don't doubt..." gets increasingly aggressive as it goes on?


----------



## andysays (Nov 4, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Andy, you need to proof-read what you post. Sometimes you come across like you're pronouncing on people from on high. It's not edifying.
> 
> BTW, have you noted how your paragraph starting "I don't doubt..." gets increasingly aggressive as it goes on?



You're right, and I will attempt to follow your advice in future, though TBH, I'm hardly the only one who comes across that way in this recent example.


----------



## Jimmy Turr (Nov 12, 2015)

Attention seeking nutter uses student politics as a vehicle. Who'd have thought it?


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 12, 2015)

Jimmy Turr said:


> Attention seeking nutter uses student politics as a vehicle. Who'd have thought it?


Who? Mustafa or the guy who reported her?


----------



## Jimmy Turr (Nov 12, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Who? Mustafa or the guy who reported her?


Her.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 12, 2015)

Jimmy Turr said:


> Her.


She has a name


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 12, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Who? Mustafa or the guy who reported her?



The poster who made that comment IMO.

You know _using student poilitics/this thread to attention seek._


----------



## Jimmy Turr (Nov 12, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> The poster who made that comment IMO.
> 
> You know _using student poilitics/this thread to attention seek._


Gosh, yes.


----------



## Jimmy Turr (Nov 12, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> She has a name


Big deal. So have I.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 12, 2015)

Jimmy Turr said:


> Big deal. So have I.


If you want to be understood, make an effort. And have a point to make.


----------



## Jimmy Turr (Nov 12, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> If you want to be understood, make an effort. And have a point to make.


You seem more bored than me.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 12, 2015)

It's our quarterly ninj visit.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 12, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It's our quarterly ninj visit.


guess again


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Nov 12, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> guess again



Monthly visit?


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 12, 2015)

Not every dick is Ninj


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 12, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Not every dick is Ninj


But every ninj is a dick.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 12, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> guess again



Well he hasn't said Haystacks yet.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 13, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> She has a name



He probably suspects her of dyeing her hair and/or having tattoos.


----------



## JHE (Nov 21, 2015)

Bahar Mustafa has now resigned following an accusation of bullying.



> Today she announced she would be resigning after being accused of bullying students’ union president Adrihani Rashid, who has resigned from her £22,000-a-year role. Sources today claimed Ms Mustafa, 28, and campaigns and activities officer Alex Etches created a “hostile” working environment, undermined Ms Rashid, “badmouthed” her to other students and accused her of behaving “undemocratically” when she refused their demands to issue public solidarity statements backing protests and occupations carried out by other students.
> 
> The students’ union has pledged to launch an independent inquiry into the bullying claims, backed by the university, which called for a full investigation.


Goldsmiths student diversity officer Bahar Mustafa says she's quitting

It's never pleasant to be forced out of a job, but I feel sure that, despite this setback, Ms Mustafa has a lucrative career ahead of her in the diversity training and co-ordination sector or as an HR twaddle spouter.


----------



## likesfish (Nov 21, 2015)

So nothing of value then?


----------



## Dowie (Nov 21, 2015)

sounds like they all need to get a grip - elected officials with different views/agendas arguing and bickering with each other, who'd have thought that could happen?


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

Goldsmiths is an odd place isn't it? Maryam Namazie was speaking to the atheist society there on Monday night, which sparked a chain of events resulting in - among other things - the Goldsmiths Feminist Society putting out a statement 'standing with' the Islamic society against an ex-muslim feminist.

Goldsmiths ISOC fails to intimidate and silence dissenters


----------



## TopCat (Dec 2, 2015)

Bonkers Bruno.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

These people are not funny now.


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

is this kind of bullshit happening all over or is Goldsmiths some kind of hotbed of total pricks?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 2, 2015)

given the previous form I'd guess at the latter


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> is this kind of bullshit happening all over or is Goldsmiths some kind of hotbed of total pricks?


Goldsmiths a hot bed of dickery?


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

I know, it seems unlikely.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> I know, it seems unlikely.


My sister went there - the only one one in whole fucking family ever and that's where she ended up.


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

It's very brave of you to talk about it butch - I know it must hurt.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

I will not be silenced by these terrorists.


----------



## sihhi (Dec 2, 2015)

It is all a bit weird Goldsmith's Feminist Society promotes Goldsmith's Sex Worker Solidarity Society. The latter's rules for members posting on facebook page:

_Do not speak over sex workers. ...
If you yourself are a “civilian” (a person who has not engaged in sex work or transactional sex) or are otherwise discussing topics you have no personal knowledge of or personal stake in, consider the assumptions and knowledge that you bring to all discussions and be mindful of this. By the same token, knowing your own personal position is not the same as knowing that of others._


----------



## J Ed (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> Goldsmiths is an odd place isn't it? Maryam Namazie was speaking to the atheist society there on Monday night, which sparked a chain of events resulting in - among other things - the Goldsmiths Feminist Society putting out a statement 'standing with' the Islamic society against an ex-muslim feminist.
> 
> Goldsmiths ISOC fails to intimidate and silence dissenters




Their ISOC's main ostensible objection was that Namazie was violating their 'safe space'. You would have to be a seriously gullible fool to buy into that, and sure enough...


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

If you're against Maryam Namazie then you're in trouble.


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

a _known islamophobe_, it says here.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> a _known islamophobe_, it says here.


Maryam? ( id did read the 'piece' btw)


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

I fear for our future.


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Maryam? ( id did read the 'piece' btw)


the goldsmiths femsoc statement (are you still struggling with the new embeds?)

_Goldsmiths Feminist Society stands in solidarity with Goldsmiths Islamic Society. We support them in condemning the actions of the Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society and agree that hosting known islamophobes at our university creates a climate of hatred. _


----------



## J Ed (Dec 2, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> I fear for our future.



This stuff isn't going away is it? It's being institutionalised.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 2, 2015)

BTW the latest Behind the News podcast discusses how 'safe space' talk is being used by university authorities in the US as justification for suppressing protest which is interesting.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> the goldsmiths femsoc statement (are you still struggling with the new embeds?)
> 
> _Goldsmiths Feminist Society stands in solidarity with Goldsmiths Islamic Society. We support them in condemning the actions of the Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society and agree that hosting known islamophobes at our university creates a climate of hatred. _


Nah, just forgot what you posted up above. (The ghostery tip worked btw for anyone else having trouble).


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 2, 2015)

that is some scarey shit


----------



## J Ed (Dec 2, 2015)

I wonder how many people have been turned off of decent politics by the mad defence of Islamists and Islamist demands by _intersectionalista _culture war shit both directly and indirectly, a lot I bet.


----------



## andysays (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> a _known islamophobe_, it says here.



This is the "logic" by which this sort of subjectivist identity politics works - if a handful of members of the Islamic Society at Goldsmiths say that Maryam Namazie is islamophobic, then she becomes "a known islamophobe", simple as.

To question that, to ask them to explain why or put forward an argument to back up their assertion would be to commit that cardinal sin of ID politics, to "deny their experience". It's ridiculous, but it's not surprising - it's not that different to some of the subjectivist guff that gets posted on threads here from time to time.

It appears to be commonplace in the smallish bubble of the student left/commentariat/intersectionalist world, but I'm still not sure how significant it is beyond that, just as I'm not sure how significant the whole Diversity Officer tweets furore is/was in the wider world.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 2, 2015)

Cheap at the price...


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

J Ed said:


> I wonder how many people have been turned off of decent politics by the mad defence of Islamists and Islamist demands by _intersectionalista _culture war shit both directly and indirectly, a lot I bet.


Probably, but if you go looking for mad shit, it's easy to find: there's alway some tool on twitter ready to be held up as evidence for whatever point you may be wishing to make. 

I think the sudden interest in intersectional student politics in the national press is part of a general push to discredit left wing politics in general. I don't know how institutionalised this stuff is - probably not as bad as you think. It's just been magnified by people with an agenda.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> Probably, but if you go looking for mad shit, it's easy to find: there's alway some tool on twitter ready to be held up as evidence for whatever point you may be wishing to make.
> 
> I think the sudden interest in intersectional student politics in the national press is part of a general push to discredit left wing politics in general. I don't know how institutionalised this stuff is - probably not as bad as you think. It's just been magnified by people with an agenda.


When it comes to 'respecting' people you disagree with, there are certainly parallels between personnel departments and intersectionalists (and not just as a linguistic overlap).


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> I think the sudden interest in intersectional student politics in the national press is part of a general push to discredit left wing politics in general. I don't know how institutionalised this stuff is - probably not as bad as you think. It's just been magnified by people with an agenda.



I have honestly never come across it outside of the internet, and by that I mean these boards and stories linked to from it really. I've never heard anyone even discuss it I don't think.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> Probably, but if you go looking for mad shit, it's easy to find: there's alway some tool on twitter ready to be held up as evidence for whatever point you may be wishing to make.
> 
> I think the sudden interest in intersectional student politics in the national press is part of a general push to discredit left wing politics in general. I don't know how institutionalised this stuff is - probably not as bad as you think. It's just been magnified by people with an agenda.


I don't think so - there are mad people in position now who weren't before using a set of justifications that they didn't before.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 2, 2015)

who can forget 'we are all hizbollah' from ages ago. Total minority weirds picked up and used as a stick


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> who can forget 'we are all hizbollah' from ages ago. Total minority weirds picked up and used as a stick


Stop getting things  slightly wrong. You're driving me batty.


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I have honestly never come across it outside of the internet, and by that I mean these boards and stories linked to from it really. I've never heard anyone even discuss I don't think.


I have, but almost never with approval.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 2, 2015)

Roy Batty, lost like tears in rain


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

do you know that grumbling fur track commie?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> do you know that grumbling fur track commie?


link me up


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)




----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


>



It's great but the david batty yorks one is better. They rarely reach those heights.


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

Pehaps, but I bet he isn't playing Cafe Oto tonight with Charlemagne Palestine.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> Pehaps, but I bet he isn't playing Cafe Oto tonight with Charlemagne Palestine.


Course he is.


----------



## phildwyer (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> I think the sudden interest in intersectional student politics in the national press is part of a general push to discredit left wing politics in general.



The time has come for anti-capitalists to break decisively with identity politics.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


>



sonourous. Not bad though. The vocals carry it.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 2, 2015)

J Ed said:


> BTW the latest Behind the News podcast discusses how 'safe space' talk is being used by university authorities in the US as justification for suppressing protest which is interesting.



BTW for anyone interested, and I think it touches on the subject that this thread is turning towards - the institutionalisation of 'intersectionality', his latest book about Hillary Clinton is on sale at orbooks, 20% off paperback and the e-book is only $1


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> The time has come for anti-capitalists to break decisively with identity politics.


Am I going to regret asking how this might be achieved?


----------



## phildwyer (Dec 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> Am I going to regret asking how this might be achieved?



By telling the exponents of identity politics to fuck off, basically.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 2, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> By telling the exponents of identity politics to fuck off, basically.



Check


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2015)

The Brendan O'Neil method? That... erm. works.


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 3, 2015)

I suspect quite a few Solfedders and London Black Revolutionaries are Gsmiths alumni


----------



## DrRingDing (Dec 3, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I suspect quite a few Solfedders and London Black Revolutionaries are Gsmiths alumni



It's where they're hatched out of gelatinous alien eggs.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 3, 2015)

Thing is this stuff is easy to mock and should be.
Religions treatment of women glbt,unbelivers quitters should always be called and if its anything other than I feel sad for them but I can't do anything except pray for them.
Then fuck em.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> Goldsmiths is an odd place isn't it? Maryam Namazie was speaking to the atheist society there on Monday night, which sparked a chain of events resulting in - among other things - the Goldsmiths Feminist Society putting out a statement 'standing with' the Islamic society against an ex-muslim feminist.
> 
> Goldsmiths ISOC fails to intimidate and silence dissenters




Fuckwits talk about turkeys voting for christmas


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Dec 3, 2015)

_"The Muslim hecklers repeatedly interrupted the early part of the talk, shouting 'safe space' and laughing."_

Islamist students try to disrupt ex-Muslim Maryam Namazie’s talk on blasphemy at Goldsmiths University


----------



## Wilf (Dec 3, 2015)

Declaring a 'safe space' has become like Reading the Riot Act or calling for a Batting Powerplay in the cricket.  All normal rules will be suspended.


----------



## rekil (Dec 3, 2015)

Vid at the bottom of fozzie's link, or here



Spoiler


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Dec 3, 2015)

This baffling fusion of 'left' and 'right' won't end well for the Intersectionalistas. The right wing (of which I class Salafist nutjobs a part of) will always win out against liberal studenty types, who on the whole are too wet to recognise their enemy.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2015)

That vid is nearly two hours long 

Has anyone watched it, prepared to summarise?


----------



## rekil (Dec 3, 2015)

cesare said:


> That vid is nearly two hours long
> 
> Has anyone watched it, prepared to summarise?


I got about 20 mins in and will try watch more this evening. It settles down after a few minutes messing from the lads.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2015)

copliker said:


> I got about 20 mins in and will try watch more this evening. It settles down after a few minutes messing from the lads.


Be interested to know whether worth watching the whole thing.


----------



## rekil (Dec 3, 2015)

cesare said:


> Be interested to know whether worth watching the whole thing.


Thumbs up from me.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 3, 2015)

copliker said:


> Vid at the bottom of fozzie's link, or here
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler




Pretty disgusting behaviour from the ISOC in evidence in that video, the Feminist Society there are clearly idiots.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 3, 2015)

Incredibly juvenile behaviour too, leaving a coat and wandering out the door so you have an excuse to come back in a disrupt a lecture? That's year 7 disruptive behaviour at best.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 3, 2015)

I got about half way through, I can't watch any more it's making me too angry. Good on Maryam for keeping her composure and refusing to be intimidated by these morons.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 3, 2015)

J Ed said:


> I got about half way through, I can't watch any more it's making me too angry. Good on Maryam for keeping her composure and refusing to be intimidated by these morons.


She's been better initimidatised (attempted anyway) by more dangerous  people than these clowns. And did she give a fuck?


----------



## Blood Tonic (Dec 3, 2015)

Blagsta said:


> She sounds like an idiot



Agreed and just signed petition in support of her being sacked.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 3, 2015)

Won't make the station.


----------



## agricola (Dec 3, 2015)

Where was the intimidation?  I didn't see anyone make anonymous comments on social media or stick post-it notes to a door during that whole thing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 3, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Pretty disgusting behaviour from the ISOC in evidence in that video, the Feminist Society there are clearly idiots.



Only if you assume normative standards of behaviour are in play, you patriarchal fuck!


----------



## xenon (Dec 3, 2015)

You'll spend too much time on twitter.


----------



## sihhi (Dec 4, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Incredibly juvenile behaviour too, leaving a coat and wandering out the door so you have an excuse to come back in a disrupt a lecture? That's year 7 disruptive behaviour at best.



The sexual minority Society at Goldsmiths can't name a single antisocial thing anyone from ISOC have ever done. In fact they are "nothing but charming, patient, kind, and peaceful"


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

sihhi said:


> The sexual minority Society at Goldsmiths can't name a single antisocial thing anyone from ISOC have ever done. In fact they are "nothing but charming, patient, kind, and peaceful"


never heard of an lgbtq etc soc calling themselves 'the sexual minority society' before.


----------



## sihhi (Dec 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> never heard of an lgbtq etc soc calling themselves 'the sexual minority society' before.



yes it should be minority sexuality
if we're on that route it's not lgbtq etc it's lgbtqplus

_LGBT+ community is more than people identified as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered. We also have Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Asexual, Allies, Pansexual, 2-Spirited and all sorts of minor sexualities.
A good friend of mine, who identifies herself as skoliosexual in LSE, does not feel like she is an L, G, B, or T, yet absolutely feels part of the community. The addition of a + symbol makes sure everyone gets included in a way that makes them feel respected just for who they are, and does not force them to try and fit into a label.
Part of our role as the LGBTQQIAAP(+2S) community is to make space for everyone. _


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

2 spirited? Fantastique.


----------



## BigMoaner (Dec 4, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Fuckwits talk about turkeys voting for christmas


it really is beyond belief.


----------



## mk12 (Dec 4, 2015)

Everyone feels a part of the LGBTABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ group that I set up.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Dec 4, 2015)

mk12 said:


> Everyone feels a part of the LGBTABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ group that I set up.



Latinist!

की तस्वीरें

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## crossthebreeze (Dec 4, 2015)

sihhi said:


> The sexual minority Society at Goldsmiths can't name a single antisocial thing anyone from ISOC have ever done. In fact they are "nothing but charming, patient, kind, and peaceful"


Bloody hell. When I was at uni 15 or so years ago (not Goldsmiths or London), one of the main roles of the LGBT society was supporting those of us from religious conservative backgrounds (many of us catholic or protestant, some of us muslim, a few of us hindu or jewish) who were confused, scared, and sometimes facing abuse, homelesssness, financial troubles, and violence, because of our homophobic families.  Our main campaigning activity was for the lifting of section 28 and the equalisation of consent laws, but locally our focus was often on opposing religious fundamentalism across the board (the university christian union was controlled by a particularly intolerant bunch at the time, and we supported the NUS no platform of hizb ut tahrir, a ban which was also supported by various muslim feminists I knew). 

I don't understand how a LGBTQ+ society can come out in solidarity with a society that has (according to google) invited hizb ut tahrir and anti-gay speakers to campus in the past, and call for the banning of a pro-LGBT feminist.  It just doesn't make sense.


----------



## BigMoaner (Dec 4, 2015)

crossthebreeze said:


> Bloody hell. When I was at uni 15 or so years ago (not Goldsmiths or London), one of the main roles of the LGBT society was supporting those of us from religious conservative backgrounds (many of us catholic or protestant, some of us muslim, a few of us hindu or jewish) who were confused, scared, and sometimes facing abuse, homelesssness, financial troubles, and violence, because of our homophobic families.  Our main campaigning activity was for the lifting of section 28 and the equalisation of consent laws, but locally our focus was often on opposing religious fundamentalism across the board (the university christian union was controlled by a particularly intolerant bunch at the time, and we supported the NUS no platform of hizb ut tahrir, a ban which was also supported by various muslim feminists I knew).
> 
> I don't understand how a LGBTQ+ society can come out in solidarity with a society that has (according to google) invited hizb ut tahrir and anti-gay speakers to campus in the past, and call for the banning of a pro-LGBT feminist.  It just doesn't make sense.


contrary teenagers do this sort of thing.


----------



## BigMoaner (Dec 4, 2015)

"opening our hearts to humans unlike ourselves"


----------



## likesfish (Dec 4, 2015)

Because they is brown so obviously more oppressed than anyone.
 Sort of double think that had a leftie tearing in into a gay irish catholic for saying bad things about the irish catholic church 
 The argument being criticsing the irish catholic church meant you were a tool of british imperilaism in ireland.
 No everybody else thought it was a bollocks arguement as well but he made it


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

crossthebreeze said:


> Bloody hell. When I was at uni 15 or so years ago (not Goldsmiths or London), one of the main roles of the LGBT society was supporting those of us from religious conservative backgrounds (many of us catholic or protestant, some of us muslim, a few of us hindu or jewish) who were confused, scared, and sometimes facing abuse, homelesssness, financial troubles, and violence, because of our homophobic families.  Our main campaigning activity was for the lifting of section 28 and the equalisation of consent laws, but locally our focus was often on opposing religious fundamentalism across the board (the university christian union was controlled by a particularly intolerant bunch at the time, and we supported the NUS no platform of hizb ut tahrir, a ban which was also supported by various muslim feminists I knew).
> 
> I don't understand how a LGBTQ+ society can come out in solidarity with a society that has (according to google) invited hizb ut tahrir and anti-gay speakers to campus in the past, and call for the banning of a pro-LGBT feminist.  It just doesn't make sense.


millions of pms of support


----------



## smokedout (Dec 4, 2015)

crossthebreeze said:


> I don't understand how a LGBTQ+ society can come out in solidarity with a society that has (according to google) invited hizb ut tahrir and anti-gay speakers to campus in the past, and call for the banning of a pro-LGBT feminist.  It just doesn't make sense.



If you still expect it to make sense you haven't been paying attention


----------



## BigMoaner (Dec 4, 2015)

"We find that personal and social harm enacted by 'free speech' is also foul."


----------



## killer b (Dec 4, 2015)

All aboard the Allyship!


----------



## BigMoaner (Dec 4, 2015)

what would they rather, a world of free speech where people get offended now and then, or a world without? I don't get their argument.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Because they is brown so obviously more oppressed than anyone.
> Sort of double think that had a leftie tearing in into a gay irish catholic for saying bad things about the irish catholic church
> The argument being criticsing the irish catholic church meant you were a tool of british imperilaism in ireland.
> No everybody else thought it was a bollocks arguement as well but he made it


You get all sorts down the NAAFI, innit.


----------



## BigMoaner (Dec 4, 2015)

"We find that personal and social harm enacted by 'free speech' is also foul."

what does this mean?


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> what would they rather, a world of free speech where people get offended now and then, or a world without? I don't get their argument.


What they want is to imitate the cool kids in America. They don't even know that the American "left" are a bunch of tossers who have achieved absolutely nothing, and who have nothing to teach the rest of the world in terms of tactics or strategy.


----------



## killer b (Dec 4, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> "We find that personal and social harm enacted by 'free speech' is also foul."
> 
> what does this mean?


it means they're fucking idiots.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

_Victims - thousands of 'em_


----------



## BigMoaner (Dec 4, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> "opening our hearts to humans unlike ourselves"


except the humanist society then.


----------



## imposs1904 (Dec 4, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> 2 spirited? Fantastique.



I hope I don't regret asking this but what's "2 spirited". I googled it and it came up with images of Eddie "the Eagle" Edwards.


----------



## BigMoaner (Dec 4, 2015)

"Absurdly, this very group which speaks of “safe spaces” has in the past invited Hamza Tzortzis of IERA which says beheading of apostates is painless and Moazem Begg of Cage Prisoners that advocates “defensive jihad.”"

little safe zone to have a natter about throat cutting.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

imposs1904 said:


> I hope I don't regret asking this but what's "2 spirited". I googled it and it came up with images of Eddie "the Eagle" Edwards.


Eddie doesn't talk about it much,he's a very private person.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 4, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> "We find that personal and social harm enacted by 'free speech' is also foul."
> 
> what does this mean?



It means that they disapprove of the fact that people feel free to say hurtful things, and would like to be able to censor the speech and censure the speaker.


----------



## JimW (Dec 4, 2015)

imposs1904 said:


> I hope I don't regret asking this but what's "2 spirited". I googled it and it came up with images of Eddie "the Eagle" Edwards.


Bit of cultural appropriation of something native American I'd guess. Naughty intersectionals.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 4, 2015)

interestingly zionists in america have also been using this safe-space shit to silence any discussion of BDS etc.


----------



## rekil (Dec 4, 2015)

JimW said:


> Bit of cultural appropriation of something native American I'd guess. Naughty intersectionals.


Maybe there's a significant native american presence in the LSE?


----------



## cesare (Dec 4, 2015)

imposs1904 said:


> I hope I don't regret asking this but what's "2 spirited". I googled it and it came up with images of Eddie "the Eagle" Edwards.


Native American culture recognised/recognises transgender as "two spirited". Not an exact comparison because there's an additional spiritual/religious overlay, but it's a positive concept from another culture which many transgender people find helpful/useful etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

cesare said:


> Native American culture recognised/recognises transgender as "two spirited". Not an exact comparison because there's an additional spiritual/religious overlay, but it's a positive concept from another culture which many transgender people find helpful/useful etc.


That's disappointingly mundane. I had hoped it was if you believe that you were a bear or something.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> That's disappointingly mundane. I had hoped it was if you believe that you were a bear or something.


That's "otherkin", I think, butch.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> That's "otherkin", I think, butch.


History's greatest victims.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> History's greatest victims.


Yet also. . . _history's greatest monsters._


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> Yet also. . . _history's greatest monsters._


Swings and roundabouts. Certain _types _might do well to learn that lesson.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Swings and roundabouts. Certain _types _might do well to learn that lesson.


The horror, the horror:

From Otherkin to Transethnicity: Your Field Guide to the Weird World of Tumblr Identity Politics


----------



## LDC (Dec 4, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> The horror, the horror:
> 
> From Otherkin to Transethnicity: Your Field Guide to the Weird World of Tumblr Identity Politics



Best ever excuse for the benefits office though... "A toddler and a flying dog CANNOT do work intended for an adult human."


----------



## killer b (Dec 4, 2015)

I have a mate who sexually identifies as a dragon - he's actually alright, and not the kind of weird hyper-child you automatically assume someone who identifies as a dragon would be. Takes allsorts dunnit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

killer b said:


> I have a mate who sexually identifies as a dragon - he's actually alright, and not the kind of weird hyper-child you automatically assume someone who identifies as a child would be. Takes allsorts dunnit.


a male dragon or a female dragon?


----------



## killer b (Dec 4, 2015)

male. His dragon alter-ego has a very carefully constructed and detailed backstory too.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 4, 2015)

chinese style dragon or the great wyrm style one of st george fame?


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2015)

killer b said:


> I have a mate who sexually identifies as a dragon - he's actually alright, and not the kind of weird hyper-child you automatically assume someone who identifies as a dragon would be. Takes allsorts dunnit.



there are rather a lot of them around.  As well as Dragons there are people who identify with wolves, elves and even one I came across who identifies as a peanut.

They tend to be teenagers who spend too much time hanging out on Tumblr.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

killer b said:


> male. His dragon alter-ego has a very carefully constructed and detailed backstory too.


Is your friend.  . . Albi the racist dragon?

And are you the badly burned Albanian boy?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> chinese style dragon or the great wyrm style one of st george fame?


or the lampton worm


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 4, 2015)

BigMoaner said:


> Moazem Begg of Cage Prisoners that advocates “defensive jihad.”"


Off topic, but isn't defensive jihad just a term for a defensive war within a religious context, and don't most peope agree that defensive wars are fine? Fundamentally is a war to defend a religion worse than a law to defend a nation state?


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> or the lampton worm


Hampton wick, more like.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

Brainaddict said:


> Off topic, but isn't defensive jihad just a term for a defensive war within a religious context, and don't most peope agree that defensive wars are fine? Fundamentally is a war to defend a religion worse than a law to defend a nation state?


isn't a war to defend a religion similar to a war on terror? if you have to start it you've already lost.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

Brainaddict said:


> Off topic, but isn't defensive jihad just a term for a defensive war within a religious context, and don't most peope agree that defensive wars are fine? Fundamentally is a war to defend a religion worse than a law to defend a nation state?


It's code for other things of course. An elastic defence. The same justification Bush literally used in 2002-3.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2015)

mrs nbe did postgrad stuff at golfsmiths recently - she is blissfilly unaware of theses machinations - I think the shouty agitprop communiques of  these groups bears no relationship to their size/membership


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

...but poss a large one as regards later career.


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2015)

Wolflady


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

not-bono-ever said:


> blissfilly


surely not the blissfilly out of elfin laughter who had such a surprising win at lingfield in '05?


----------



## JimW (Dec 4, 2015)

Bet no-one goes for randy bandicoot.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> surely not the blissfilly out of elfin laughter who had such a surprising win at lingfield in '05?


Group 1 that mind.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

JimW said:


> Bet no-one goes for randy bandicoot.


a great disappointment at newmarket earlier this year.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2015)

.


----------



## LDC (Dec 4, 2015)

Fingers said:


> Wolflady




I suspect at some point later in life she might regret committing that all to Youtube.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

not-bono-ever said:


> phones are supposed to be useful for dyslexics. I think my predictive  texting app is fucked


tbh i just thought it was a typo: apols for any offence caused.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> isn't a war to defend a religion similar to a war on terror? if you have to start it you've already lost.


I don't see the similarity, no. As for it being 'code', it may well be among some people, but is it so easy to interpret a particular person's use of it? I admit I haven't heard the context Begg said it in, but the link about didn't explain that, which is unfortunate.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2015)

np. I am also a lazy wanker


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

Brainaddict said:


> I don't see the similarity, no. As for it being 'code', it may well be among some people, but is it so easy to interpret a particular person's use of it? I admit I haven't heard the context Begg said it in, but the link about didn't explain that, which is unfortunate.


Begg and CAGE _is _the context.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

Brainaddict said:


> I don't see the similarity, no. As for it being 'code', it may well be among some people, but is it so easy to interpret a particular person's use of it? I admit I haven't heard the context Begg said it in, but the link about didn't explain that, which is unfortunate.


you don't see that a war to defend an idea is on the same level as a war on an idea. i am sorry to hear that.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 4, 2015)

JimW said:


> Bet no-one goes for randy bandicoot.


you might be suprised, Crash Bandicoot has a large fanbase as a platforming game so the animal may be more popular than you assume


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

Fingers said:


> Wolflady



I think that's Auckland.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I suspect at some point later in life she might regret committing that all to Youtube.


I think it's just the right side of "one day we'll look back on this and laugh".

It's not like she joined the SWP or anything.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 4, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> You get all sorts down the NAAFI, innit.



Brighton unemployed centre unfortunate lefty went off to study politics at Queens where  his claiming to be an activist  was treated with derision


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Brighton unemployed centre unfortunate lefty went off to study politics at Queens where  his claiming to be an activist  was treated with derision


Queen's University Belfast? If so, then I think I knew him, and if it's the same person, he was one of the good guys as far as I'm concerned. As well as being a bit eccentric (but hey I'm in no position to judge).


----------



## likesfish (Dec 4, 2015)

Possibly **** *****  first person I ever met who used bourgeoisie in casual conversation seriously


----------



## TopCat (Dec 4, 2015)

Fingers said:


> Wolflady


.
When she starts to chase birds in the park..


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Possibly BLANKETY BLANK  first person I ever met who used bourgeoisie in casual conversation seriously


Hey, the QUB Shinners tried to smear him on the internet, so he must have been doing something right.

(I'd make his real name a bit harder to determine there, if I were you)


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Possibly and* w****  first person I ever met who used bourgeoisie in casual conversation seriously


as opposed to the numerous people you'd previously met who dropped it into conversation for comick effect.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> as opposed to the numerous people you'd previously met who dropped it into conversation for comick effect.


And the hordes who use unusual spellings of their invention for similar purposes.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 4, 2015)

Ok sorry about that once lectured me about state actors inflitrating the centre when I was locking up in TA uniform .

Didnt have the heart to mention that none of the users were classed officaly as subversives it would have crushed them


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> I think that's Auckland.



Looks like Melbourne


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

Fingers said:


> Looks like Melbourne


Same architects?

likesfish - you should have offered to train them in how to kill a man with a plastic spoon.


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> Same architects?
> 
> likesfish - you should have offered to train them in how to kill a man with a plastic spoon.



I was going by the trams.  Do they have trams in Auckland? Do they have wolves in NZ? If so she may have emmigrated


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

Fingers said:


> I was going by the trams.  Do they have trams in Auckland? Do they have wolves in NZ? If so she may have emmigrated








auckland's trams famous for their overcrowding


----------



## andysays (Dec 4, 2015)

killer b said:


> I have a mate who sexually identifies as a dragon - he's actually alright, and not the kind of weird hyper-child you automatically assume someone who identifies as a dragon would be. Takes allsorts dunnit.



I'll probably regret asking this, but what does "sexually identifies as a dragon" mean in practical terms?

Oral sex would be a bit risky, I imagine


----------



## killer b (Dec 4, 2015)

Fuck knows. I think it's just a variant on the furries tbh (scaly?). I didn't ask for details.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 4, 2015)

andysays said:


> I'll probably regret asking this, but what does "sexually identifies as a dragon" mean in practical terms?


Fictional sex life.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

People get turned on by things then turn that into identity?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

I think he just _really _likes the dragon currry on thursday in wethersppons.


----------



## andysays (Dec 4, 2015)

killer b said:


> Fuck knows. I think it's just a variant on the furries tbh (scaly?). I didn't ask for details.



Fair enough.

I'm trying to imagine a situation where it would *just* come up in conversation with a friend and then me *not* asking for details...


----------



## stethoscope (Dec 4, 2015)

andysays said:


> I'll probably regret asking this, but what does "sexually identifies as a dragon" mean in practical terms?
> 
> Oral sex would be a bit risky, I imagine



Fire breathingbreeding.


----------



## rekil (Dec 4, 2015)

Fingers said:


> Wolflady



In her defence, whoever runs that channel is clearly a cunt. 

The Sandre Guy


----------



## LDC (Dec 4, 2015)

copliker said:


> In her defence, whoever runs that channel is clearly a cunt.
> 
> The Sandre Guy



Yes, weird though it is (to me) the words over the video just smacked a bit too much of playground bullying.


----------



## rekil (Dec 4, 2015)

Exhibit a) Scum...



Spoiler


----------



## andysays (Dec 4, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> People get turned on by things then turn that into identity?



There's a big difference (it seems to me) between being turned on by something, perhaps dressing or acting in a certain way during sex to enhance that, and actually identifying as that thing (in this case a dragon).

If it isn't just a bit of hyperbolic attention-seeking to "identify as" a dragon (or whatever), then what does it actually mean?


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2015)

copliker said:


> In her defence, whoever runs that channel is clearly a cunt.
> 
> The Sandre Guy



Very true


----------



## LDC (Dec 4, 2015)

andysays said:


> There's a big difference (it seems to me) between being turned on by something, perhaps dressing or acting in a certain way during sex to enhance that, and actually identifying as that thing (in this case a dragon).
> 
> If it isn't just a bit of hyperbolic attention-seeking to "identify as" a dragon (or whatever), then what does it actually mean?



Otherkin stuff seems much more 'spiritual' than solely being about sexual attraction. Fuck knows if I can explain it any more though, but I'm sure in large part we can blame the internet.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Otherkin stuff seems much more 'spiritual' than solely being about sexual attraction. Fuck knows if I can explain it any more though, but I'm sure in large part we can blame the internet.


...and wetherspoons.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> ...and wetherspoons.


Wetherspoons - the cause of, and solution to, all life's problems.


----------



## mk12 (Dec 4, 2015)

Fingers said:


> there are rather a lot of them around.  As well as Dragons there are people who identify with wolves, elves and even one I came across *who identifies as a peanut*.
> 
> They tend to be teenagers who spend too much time hanging out on Tumblr.



This made me laugh out loud in a library


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

mk12 said:


> This made me laugh out loud in a library


shh


----------



## Wilf (Dec 4, 2015)

andysays said:


> I'll probably regret asking this, but what does "sexually identifies as a dragon" mean in practical terms?


 


Former Dragon and David Cameron business adviser arrested on suspicion of raping a 13-year-old girl


----------



## bimble (Dec 4, 2015)

Was having a friendly argument about this stuff with someone last night - he defending the 'No Platform' policy as a way of redressing power imbalances blah di blah.
He conceded that sometimes things might go a bit wrong, for example when Toronto University cancelled it's Yoga classes for disabled people because they were successfully lobbied by students who felt that yoga is a culturally appropriative thing.
True story too, I had no clue:
How a cancelled yoga class stretches the point on cultural appropriation - Macleans.ca


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

bimble said:


> Was having a friendly argument about this stuff with someone last night - he defending the 'No Platform' policy as a way of redressing power imbalances blah di blah.
> He conceded that sometimes things might go a bit wrong, for example when Toronto University cancelled it's Yoga classes for disabled people because they were successfully lobbied by students who felt that yoga is a culturally appropriative thing.
> True story too, I had no clue:
> How a cancelled yoga class stretches the point on cultural appropriation - Macleans.ca


there is a subtle difference between ottawa and toronto.



it helps if you read the article you're reporting on


----------



## bimble (Dec 4, 2015)




----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

bimble said:


>


perhaps you could post a sincere apology to the university of toronto for your error

e2a: it wasn't even a university but the student federation which cancelled it. you're full of fail today.


----------



## andysays (Dec 4, 2015)

But has anyone actually asked the University itself how *it* identifies?


----------



## bimble (Dec 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps you could post a sincere apology to the university of toronto for your error
> 
> e2a: it wasn't even a university but the student federation which cancelled it. you're full of fail today.


I'm not having a good day you're right.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2015)

andysays said:


> But has anyone actually asked the University itself how *it* identifies?


bimble


----------



## bimble (Dec 4, 2015)

I should probably be very quiet, before I offend more people or get more muddled than I already am.
BUT the funny-sad thing about the yoga story I thought is how easily things can go wrong when you have people out-victiming eachother. There will have to be a calculus devised, with points, but based of course only on self-reported feelings of oppression.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Dec 4, 2015)

andysays said:


> But has anyone actually asked the University itself how *it* identifies?



It's '2 spirited'.

On the one hand it sees itself as an open and empowering place, a site of eager study and diligent teaching, committed to the good of all humanity.

On the other it knows itself to be an oppressive machine bent on playing its part in ensuring the protection and expansion of capital in all its forms.

It's tough being a University.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## bimble (Dec 4, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> People get turned on by things then turn that into identity?


Definitely a thing. I'm going to avoid links but there are plenty of people who strive for this, full time collar wearing usually.


----------



## campanula (Dec 4, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Ok sorry about that once lectured me about state actors inflitrating the centre when I was locking up in TA uniform .




when was that, Fishy? I did a stint at BUC back in 1996-7 (O that lottery cash...and the trouble it caused)


----------



## likesfish (Dec 4, 2015)

Haha you probably ate some of my vegan slop world worst vegan kitchen coordinator.
Buc had everything
Sex drugs madness conspiracy chemical weapons stash and a creche with the world's wettest creche  worker when you get bullied by a three year


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

likesfish, our mutual acquaintance once told me proudly of how meat would sometimes get snuck past the vegan hippies. See what I mean about how he was one of the good guys?


----------



## campanula (Dec 4, 2015)

I used to do a weekly kitchen stint - my veggie crumble and tamari rice was legendary. Amazingly, despite being the most technical dimwit in the world, I (ahem) 'ran' the computer room and education (ho ho). In truth, I have fond memories and oh yeah, I painted the entrance sign.

Urk - those free tins of EEC beef?


----------



## likesfish (Dec 4, 2015)

Well at least you werent the "tutor" who ran an intro to thx


Idris2002 said:


> likesfish, our mutual acquaintance once told me proudly of how meat would sometimes get snuck past the vegan hippies. See what I mean about how he was one of the good guys?


 I know nothing

The vegbollah never proved anything


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Haha you probably ate some of my vegan slop world worst vegan kitchen coordinator.
> Buc had everything
> Sex drugs madness conspiracy chemical weapons stash and a creche with the world's wettest creche  worker when you get bullied by a three year


There's a novel in that. 

But you'd need Steven Wells to write it.

And he's dead.


----------



## belboid (Dec 4, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> There's a novel in that.
> 
> But you'd need Steven Wells to write it.
> 
> And he's dead.


Martin Millar is still around, and I suspect had already written it


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 4, 2015)

killer b said:


> All aboard the Allyship!


It'll be arriving soon


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 7, 2015)

Since this thread long since veered into general student politics stuff, I'll just leave this here...

Why Are Male Activist Students So Keen to Enforce A Macho Culture At Demonstrations? | SOAS SPIRIT


----------



## J Ed (Dec 7, 2015)

Brainaddict said:


> Since this thread long since veered into general student politics stuff, I'll just leave this here...
> 
> Why Are Male Activist Students So Keen to Enforce A Macho Culture At Demonstrations? | SOAS SPIRIT



God if he thinks that shouting at a demonstration is 'macho' I can't imagine the contempt he must feel, for example, towards the International Brigades.


----------



## belboid (Dec 7, 2015)

"We intrinsically believe that in order to make a difference, not only do we need direct action (of course), but also, we need to fight,we need to get out there and hit things, set cars on fire, maim a defenceless animal and get arrested for doing these things, all in the supposed name of anti-austerity. "

Do we?  Really?


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 7, 2015)

J Ed said:


> God if he thinks that shouting at a demonstration is 'macho' I can't imagine the contempt he must feel, for example, towards the International Brigades.


It seems blissfully unaware of...well, most of history really. And ironically, given the source, of much political action outside of Europe.

There's the ghost of a good point in the article. People engaging in risky behaviours at protests should be aware of whether they are unwittingly putting other people at risk. But that's just not being a dickhead, and doesn't require the parade of jargon and wrong-headed notions in that piece to explain it.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 7, 2015)

Brainaddict said:


> Since this thread long since veered into general student politics stuff, I'll just leave this here...
> 
> Why Are Male Activist Students So Keen to Enforce A Macho Culture At Demonstrations? | SOAS SPIRIT



He seems to have absolutely nothing to say on what he thinks should actually happen instead.

Be aware of privilege

???

Profit!


----------



## J Ed (Dec 7, 2015)

??? = Leverage your new found weariness to create new online content, monetise said content in conjunction with your personal ethical brand


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2015)

Brainaddict said:


> Since this thread long since veered into general student politics stuff, I'll just leave this here...
> 
> Why Are Male Activist Students So Keen to Enforce A Macho Culture At Demonstrations? | SOAS SPIRIT



The author is obviously in the "right on"wing of privilege theory, or he'd have realised that by listing the qualifications of the people he cited, rather than just their names, he was in effect silencing criticism through a form of appeal to authority. Brother needs to check his privilege!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2015)

belboid said:


> "We intrinsically believe that in order to make a difference, not only do we need direct action (of course), but also, we need to fight,we need to get out there and hit things, set cars on fire, maim a defenceless animal and get arrested for doing these things, all in the supposed name of anti-austerity. "
> 
> Do we?  Really?



On a majority of protests I've been on, the majority of protesters of whatever sex, gender, sexuality, class or ethnicity have stuck very much to a philosophy of "I won't *start* anything, but if the opposition/Old Bill start something, I'm not going to turn the other cheek". If there's a small core of middle-class male student knobbers doing shit he's claiming, then that's an issue for him and other protesters to police. I used to find that shoving fighty aggressive knobbers in the direction of the action soon saw them pegging it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> ??? = Leverage your new found weariness to create new online content, monetise said content in conjunction with your personal ethical brand



He'll probably change his name to something more snappy than Gil Southwood.
Perhaps something like Laurence Pennywood - Laurie to his mates?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2015)

The freaks now want the vids taken down.


----------



## bimble (Dec 8, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> The freaks now want the vids taken down.


Yes I think she's been repeatedly told to remove the video for a while, and has stood her ground of course. Maryam Namazie – Just another Freethought Blogs site


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 8, 2015)

Islamic Society President Resigns Amid Homophobic Tweet Allegations

But, you know, solidarity with that kind of thing.


----------



## sihhi (Dec 8, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> But, you know, solidarity with that kind of thing.










Shocked, I tell you.

It's almost as if modern young devout Muslims don't discuss sexuality with members of things like LGBT societies, but try to enforce their codes on other Muslims.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 8, 2015)

sihhi said:


> It's almost as if modern young devout Muslims don't discuss sexuality with members of things like LGBT societies, but try to enforce their codes on other Muslims.



Don't ask, don't tell (between the _intersectionalistas_ and the obscuritanists that is)


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2015)

As sihhi suggests -these  people are active far beyond a university - where are they active? Can we at least map them?


----------



## J Ed (Dec 8, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> As sihhi suggests -these  people are active far beyond a university - where are they active? Can we at least map them?



The Islamists or the intersectionalistas?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> The Islamists or the intersectionalistas?


Only one has real world weight. 

It ain't the poshoes.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 8, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Only one has real world weight.
> 
> It ain't the poshoes.



As far as mapping these groups I think it depends on the university, Sheffield Hallam ISOC has been controlled by Hizb ut-Tahrir for years. An account of how they control the society by an ex-member from 2003 here.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> As far as mapping these groups I think it depends on the university, Sheffield Hallam ISOC has been controlled by Hizb ut-Tahrir for years. An account of how they control the society by an ex-member from 2003 here.


Teeny little group of us  - london anarchist's will remember - opposing (UBA etc) this well before edl got on it. Opp for the left to have hard left critique of islam and  build wider coalition with muslims.  Got  called racists.


----------



## sihhi (Dec 8, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Don't ask, don't tell (between the _intersectionalistas_ and the obscuritanists that is)



In a sense yes, the young devout at Goldsmiths are happy to use the 'free speech first last' line against other LGBT groups in other universities whenever they want to, and to do so by calling LGBT groups Islamophobic. Their solidarity is with other ISOCs bringing in sexist and homophobic older devout speakers into universities.


----------



## fractionMan (Dec 8, 2015)

page 100 here we come


----------



## Wilf (Dec 8, 2015)

fractionMan said:


> page 100 here we come


#killallshortthreads


----------



## Casually Red (Dec 9, 2015)

Brainaddict said:


> Since this thread long since veered into general student politics stuff, I'll just leave this here...
> 
> Why Are Male Activist Students So Keen to Enforce A Macho Culture At Demonstrations? | SOAS SPIRIT



Roughly translated ...ban all white " macho " men from demos. It's a step up from " kill all white men " , I'll give him that much .


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2015)

Casually Red said:


> Roughly translated ...ban all white " macho " men from demos. It's a step up from " kill all white men " , I'll give him that much .


If it keeps homophobic catholic  anti-semitic pro-assad, pro nazi torturer uber using freaks with gun fetishes without the balls to _join up_ - then yeah.


----------



## sihhi (Dec 9, 2015)

J Ed said:


> As far as mapping these groups I think it depends on the university, Sheffield Hallam ISOC has been controlled by Hizb ut-Tahrir for years. An account of how they control the society by an ex-member from 2003 here.



I'd say the mainstream of young Pakistani Kashmiri or Bengali heritage third or second generation see themselves as _Muslims_.
Inevitably a fraction of them will become devout on conventional lines. 

This is what the heroic opponent of "fag lovers" was promoting on his social media:






Here's the winter version:

Light Upon Light |

with separate categories for Sister Ticket & Brother Ticket so the conference hall chairs can be split accordingly

It's not a surprise small businesses from Pakistani, Kashmiri or Bengali backgrounds advertise HT or IERA or Knowledge1st or Witness Pioneer events near where I am or where you are. Mapping them is irrelevant they're all over the place. 
90% of the time they are non-politics themed events just religious ones, so attack the event and you attack the religion.

They visit everywhere:


----------



## gosub (Dec 9, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Islamic Society President Resigns Amid Homophobic Tweet Allegations
> 
> But, you know, solidarity with that kind of thing.



Cleric who linked being gay with ‘cannibalism’ due at Goldsmiths’ Islamic society	26/2/15


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2015)

sihhi said:


> I'd say the mainstream of young Pakistani Kashmiri or Bengali heritage third or second generation see themselves as _Muslims_.
> Inevitably a fraction of them will become devout on conventional lines.
> 
> This is what the heroic opponent of "fag lovers" was promoting on his social media:
> ...


Of course you should map them as far as you can - map everything.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Dec 9, 2015)

sihhi said:


>



Beware the traps of Shaytaan, Mish Moneypenny!


----------



## sihhi (Dec 9, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Of course you should map them as far as you can - map everything.



What do you map though? How far do you go down the line is trivial sexism worth recording? I have always though even when really young it was somehow off having men going in one door and women in the side door to pray in different rooms in the same building. Holloway masjid lets a group do Arabic lessons there, I asked for info and but it is brothers only or sisters only, needs a minimum to get a class going so as far as i can see it's brothers only now. 
The Turkish not from rural Kashmir local religious leader did a home religious wedding ceremony managed to attack feminism by name, while administering the vows.

The harder ones build on this bedrock of 'the mainstream norm', so the harder ones segregate family-based events aswell as classes and prayers, then they segregate all social events and as many work scenarios as possible. Their approach is 'you're not doing proper Islam, you're doing the wishy washy souped up namby pamby kind' the real kind is the real truth and contentment.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2015)

sihhi said:


> What do you map though? How far do you go down the line is trivial sexism worth recording? I have always though even when really young it was somehow off having men going in one door and women in the side door to pray in different rooms in the same building. Holloway masjid lets a group do Arabic lessons there, I asked for info and but it is brothers only or sisters only, needs a minimum to get a class going so as far as i can see it's brothers only now.
> The Turkish not from rural Kashmir local religious leader did a home religious wedding ceremony managed to attack feminism by name, while administering the vows.
> 
> The harder ones build on this bedrock of 'the mainstream norm', so the harder ones segregate family-based events aswell as classes and prayers, then they segregate all social events and as many work scenarios as possible. Their approach is 'you're not doing proper Islam, you're doing the wishy washy souped up namby pamby kind' the real kind is the real truth and contentment.


The larger ones. They might use this stuff. Who else might?


----------



## bimble (Dec 9, 2015)

sihhi said:


> This is what the heroic opponent of "fag lovers" was promoting on his social media..


Yep. The really shit thing is that that twitter account (now hidden / deleted) belongs to the president of Goldsmiths Islamic society. yep the one one that the feminist & LGBT socs fell over themselves to side with on this issue.  
Mopey96 - Twitter Search


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

soas and goldsmiths were prominent in doing stuff in 2010 student riots, govt, shat it a bit, started mi5 on recruiting kids at 16/17 telling them to certain unis join certain soceitys. consensus democracy started/became more prominent in 2nd ucl occupation that year, jazz hands etc. also after occupy they sent people to do masters and get involved in student politics. they being the mi5. I know we are supposed to believe that its only the police the NECTU NPIOU mark kennedys mob that do the infiltrating, but its not, they work in partnership, for example on manufacturing the fake credivbilty boosting socks with GCHQ/ pitchfrod is SOLELY  about police, those students at soas are dicks "how long have you been in the security services" - "i dont have to tell you that," rather than no , no student is gonna be a cop, but i expect in their internal arguments they reckon they are practising entryism into the security services, doing a service by changing the demographics of previously public school boy straight white (paedo covering up) territory.


----------



## bimble (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> manufacturing the fake credivbilty boosting socks


 ?


----------



## LDC (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> soas and goldsmiths were prominent in doing stuff in 2010 student riots, govt, shat it a bit, started mi5 on recruiting kids at 16/17 telling them to certain unis join certain soceitys. consensus democracy started/became more prominent in 2nd ucl occupation that year, jazz hands etc. also after occupy they sent people to do masters and get involved in student politics. they being the mi5. I know we are supposed to believe that its only the police the NECTU NPIOU mark kennedys mob that do the infiltrating, but its not, they work in partnership, for example on manufacturing the fake credivbilty boosting socks with GCHQ/ pitchfrod is SOLELY  about police, those students at soas are dicks "how long have you been in the security services" - "i dont have to tell you that," rather than no , no student is gonna be a cop, but i expect in their internal arguments they reckon they are practising entryism into the security services, doing a service by changing the demographics of previously public school boy straight white (paedo covering up) territory.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

sorry first post , long time reader (digger for data etc) - yeah i think, its obvious to think "wankers" with these students, but they are spies. paragraphs paragraphs


----------



## LDC (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> sorry first post , long time reader (digger for data etc) - yeah i think, its obvious to think "wankers" with these students, but they are spies. paragraphs paragraphs



1) Which students are you suggesting are spies?
2) What evidence do you have for this assertion?


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

the aborted goldsmiths occupation of last year , "occupy goldsmiths" and the recent "occupy soas" using jazz hands , who taught them this - when it was occupy st pauls they got it from 15M , this lot claim to have got it from Free university of Amsterdam. often i find "evidence" is a function of how well and eloquently you can put your words. but yes i am asserting that the leading cadre of SOAS , whos names they refused to give us have relationships with the security industry.


----------



## BigTom (Dec 9, 2015)

Students I know in Birmingham mainly came through climate camp (with People and Planet as a feeder into climate camp), that's where they learned jazz hands and consensus politics. edit: and I would have thought it has just stayed in student politics over the years, it was endemic around 2010/11 ime.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

BigTom said:


> Students I know in Birmingham mainly came through climate camp (with People and Planet as a feeder into climate camp), that's where they learned jazz hands and consensus politics. edit: and I would have thought it has just stayed in student politics over the years, it was endemic around 2010/11 ime.


yes climate camp and its continuations - reclaim the power et al - are something we are researching as well as the FOUR companies offering to train people in this REALLY EFFECTIVIE method of organizing (really effective for 3 or 4 people acting secretly in concert to swing it whichever way they or their political masters choose) - seeds for change, catalyst, london roots, rhizome - fronts for the security services,


----------



## BigTom (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> yes climate camp and its continuations - reclaim the power et al - are something we are researching as well as the FOUR companies offering to train people in this REALLY EFFECTIVIE method of organizing (really effective for 3 or 4 people acting secretly in concert to swing it whichever way they or their political masters choose) - seeds for change, catalyst, london roots, rhizome - fronts for the security services,



who is "we"? edit; I mean, which group is it that you are part of that is doing the researching?


----------



## LDC (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> yes climate camp and its continuations - reclaim the power et al - are something we are researching as well as the FOUR companies offering to train people in this REALLY EFFECTIVIE method of organizing (really effective for 3 or 4 people acting secretly in concert to swing it whichever way they or their political masters choose) - seeds for change, catalyst, london roots, rhizome - fronts for the security services,



You're spouting completely unsubstantiated bollocks. Suggesting people work for or with the security services is something not to be done lightly or without real evidence. And by evidence I don't mean rumors, half baked theories, feelings, or personal grudges.

Until you can provide evidence of some description I suggest you fuck off with your drivel.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

sorry can you tell me a description of what evidence would look like please? examples of something that could be transmitted in words or picture or video form through the internet that we could call evidence. Confessions are the best of course, but maybe thats why im attempting to pique some peoples interest on this forum rather than just reading it, to get some other info - im suspect of consensus democracy and the groups that peddle it, yes because iv seen it fuck up lots of things over the last 5 years, the perfectly decent meeting, that suddenly "needs a facilitator" - and i wonder where this lot got all their cash. https://www.duedil.com/company/04213118/seeds-for-change-lancaster-co-operative-ltd/financials but this is off topic - the mi5 certainly work along side police and corporate assets, (for example journalists,) in subverting and informing on protests. Green entryism, the death of brian haw. but yeah 2010 student riots, shocked the authorities, cops cant pass as students, spies recruited younger, they go into these unis and start the occupations. i was there in 2010 and jazz hands was brought in , late to the campaign, 2nd ucl occupation, safe spaces intersectionality that triad -


----------



## Wilf (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> yes climate camp and its continuations - reclaim the power et al - are something we are researching as well as the FOUR companies offering to train people in this REALLY EFFECTIVIE method of organizing (really effective for 3 or 4 people acting secretly in concert to swing it whichever way they or their political masters choose) - seeds for change, catalyst, london roots, rhizome - fronts for the security services,


The jazz hands consensus stuff has been a long time and isn't an obvious indication of Mi5 involvement, to say the least.  If you've got something specific, something indicating police/security involvement, you should disseminate it through relevant networks.  Otherwise, spraying this stuff around is pointless.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> soas and goldsmiths were prominent in doing stuff in 2010 student riots, govt, shat it a bit, started mi5 on recruiting kids at 16/17 telling them to certain unis join certain soceitys. consensus democracy started/became more prominent in 2nd ucl occupation that year, jazz hands etc. also after occupy they sent people to do masters and get involved in student politics. they being the mi5. I know we are supposed to believe that its only the police the NECTU NPIOU mark kennedys mob that do the infiltrating, but its not, they work in partnership, for example on manufacturing the fake credivbilty boosting socks with GCHQ/ pitchfrod is SOLELY  about police, those students at soas are dicks "how long have you been in the security services" - "i dont have to tell you that," rather than no , no student is gonna be a cop, but i expect in their internal arguments they reckon they are practising entryism into the security services, doing a service by changing the demographics of previously public school boy straight white (paedo covering up) territory.



So basically everyone you don't like is an undercover copper? 

ABAC.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

nah, theres a distinction between cops and spies , the latter is more defensible in these peoples heads, and while jazz hands has been going a long time in maybe the greener movements , the transition for it being a form of organization from them towards other causes - housing etc is new. the revalent networks, yeah, one of the main things we are working from is a database of all the occupy london groupspaces emails - and these organizations that promote consensus democracy as a way to organize, if anyone has any info on this. specifically how long it has been about. sorry, it doesnt really matter, theres no one that really cares.


----------



## BigTom (Dec 9, 2015)

how long consensus democracy has been around? jazz hands and the other symbols? aren't they a hippie invention?


----------



## JimW (Dec 9, 2015)

BigTom said:


> how long consensus democracy has been around? jazz hands and the other symbols? aren't they a hippie invention?


Of course the hippies were part of COINTELPRO


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

i know it says in "undercover- the true story of britains secret police" and on the MI5 website that protest and public order are the domain of the police now and mi5 dont touch it but come oN!, does anyone recall the last time a protest went to mi5? a building that is always open, easy as hell to shut down (better target than parliment on a saturday IMO) but never done. . bit odd.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 9, 2015)

BigTom said:


> how long consensus democracy has been around? jazz hands and the other symbols? aren't they a hippie invention?


First time I saw it (jazzhands) in practice was the g8 camp at stirling, 2005, but it predates that I'm sure.


----------



## BigTom (Dec 9, 2015)

Police will definitely have infiltrated the student movement, probably through climate camp. GCHQ will definitely have monitored communications. MI5 probably have some files and a case officer or whatever they would call them keeping an eye on them along with loads of other left-radicals, just in case someone decides to go all red army faction, but I would need hard evidence to believe they were recruiting people at 16/17 to infiltrate the student movement.


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> soas and goldsmiths were prominent in doing stuff in 2010 student riots, govt, shat it a bit, started mi5 on recruiting kids at 16/17 telling them to certain unis join certain soceitys. consensus democracy started/became more prominent in 2nd ucl occupation that year, jazz hands etc. also after occupy they sent people to do masters and get involved in student politics. they being the mi5. I know we are supposed to believe that its only the police the NECTU NPIOU mark kennedys mob that do the infiltrating, but its not, they work in partnership, for example on manufacturing the fake credivbilty boosting socks with GCHQ/ pitchfrod is SOLELY  about police, those students at soas are dicks "how long have you been in the security services" - "i dont have to tell you that," rather than no , no student is gonna be a cop, but i expect in their internal arguments they reckon they are practising entryism into the security services, doing a service by changing the demographics of previously public school boy straight white (paedo covering up) territory.



lol


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

come on dave spart picture at least plz dotn do poetry


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

sorry wrong photo.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 9, 2015)

There's a cat who obviously enjoys a drink.


----------



## andysays (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> sorry can you tell me a description of what evidence would look like please? ...



Evidence could take various forms, so it would be silly for anyone to say what forms it should take. And evidence doesn't necessarily mean absolute definitive proof, it could be something which raises suspicions without being enough to prove "beyond reasonable doubt". But if you (especially as a new poster who nobody knows, I'm afraid) are expecting to be taken seriously, you need to provide something and so far you haven't come up with anything concrete, just some ideas which admittedly _could_ be true, but nothing to begin to back them up.

And you should also bear in mind that some people posting here might well be involved with groups which actually have been infiltrated, and/or know individuals whose lives have been seriously affected, so it's not a subject on which idle groundless speculation is likely to be appreciated.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

this is Janie Mac - she is a legal observer for the green and black cross- here she is receiving a cheque from LUSH - (who also fund things like Balcombe anti fracking bollocks) - run by mi5s jamie kelsey fry Janie Mac | Facebook - 

here is Statement of Solidarity with Simon Moore a petition for simon moore - ( son of mi6 man - but in my book a good egg) protesting against an "olympic Asbo) - simon was also part of democracy village, portions of which harrassed and helped Brian Haw to his death.(but thats another chapter- in my book - to be published post revolution - "the fictionilization of dissent - protest 2009 - )  -blog: 17.12.2010. UPDATE ...my new campaign, is a campaign against Brian Haw..." well worth a watch though, (hard viewing) - 






here so shes signing it from this he smackedbroaccount - WHICH! is this guy - Off to get clean and sober

Seamus Colligan 

http://www.soundthealarm.org.uk/seamus-colligan/ 

who are warned about here - now


----------



## Wilf (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> nah, theres a distinction between cops and spies , the latter is more defensible in these peoples heads, and while jazz hands has been going a long time in maybe the greener movements , the transition for it being a form of organization from them towards other causes - housing etc is new. the revalent networks, yeah, one of the main things we are working from is a database of all the occupy london groupspaces emails - and these organizations that promote consensus democracy as a way to organize, if anyone has any info on this. specifically how long it has been about. sorry, it doesnt really matter, theres no one that really cares.



I'm vaguely aware of 'consultants' or other assorted twats who pop up from time to time to 'advise' protest groups, train them etc.  Yes, it's plausible that the security services would see these as a fine old way in to the more naive groups who might take them seriously. However you must see that as a new poster who no one knows, people are going to be sceptical about your claims.  If you've really got a history in the movement(s), why don't you take this to your group(s)?  If there's something people should know, get it out there, _properly_.  Otherwise this is just random flatus.


----------



## bimble (Dec 9, 2015)




----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> this is Janie Mac - she is a legal observer for the green and black cross- here she is receiving a cheque from LUSH - (who also fund things like Balcombe anti fracking bollocks) - run by mi5s jamie kelsey fry Janie Mac | Facebook -
> 
> here is Statement of Solidarity with Simon Moore a petition for simon moore - ( son of mi6 man - but in my book a good egg) protesting against an "olympic Asbo) - simon was also part of democracy village, portions of which harrassed and helped Brian Haw to his death.(but thats another chapter- in my book - to be published post revolution - "the fictionilization of dissent - protest 2009 - )  -blog: 17.12.2010. UPDATE ...my new campaign, is a campaign against Brian Haw..." well worth a watch though, (hard viewing) -
> 
> ...




You are either a returnee, about 13 or need help.

The same accusation could be levelled at me sometimes but there you go....


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 9, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> You're spouting completely unsubstantiated bollocks. Suggesting people work for or with the security services is something not to be done lightly or without real evidence. And by evidence I don't mean rumors, half baked theories, feelings, or personal grudges.
> 
> Until you can provide evidence of some description I suggest you fuck off with your drivel.



Well, you would say that. After all, you're obviously a state asset!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 9, 2015)

BigTom said:


> Police will definitely have infiltrated the student movement, probably through climate camp. GCHQ will definitely have monitored communications. MI5 probably have some files and a case officer or whatever they would call them keeping an eye on them along with loads of other left-radicals, just in case someone decides to go all red army faction, but I would need hard evidence to believe they were recruiting people at 16/17 to infiltrate the student movement.



Apart from anything else same rules as OB and military apply - you can recruit at 17, but you can't use someone "in the field" until 18.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> i know it says in "undercover- the true story of britains secret police" and on the MI5 website that protest and public order are the domain of the police now and mi5 dont touch it but come oN!, does anyone recall the last time a protest went to mi5? a building that is always open, easy as hell to shut down (better target than parliment on a saturday IMO) but never done. . bit odd.



Go for a long stroll around the area one day. Check out the surveillance kit on the approaches and nearby buildings. Check out the sightlines and defensible positions on the perimeter. People don't go there to protest because if they've got a strategic brain-cell in their head, it's fairly obvious that protesters would be wrapped up and kettled _tout_ fucking _suite_.


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Well, you would say that. After all, you're obviously a state asset!



Can I just fess up now - I work next door to M16

I've chucked my CV over the wall, applied online and all sorts but they won't have me. I'd happily work for them if they signed a contract promising not to kill me, tie me up in a bag and tell my mum that I like to wear women's clothes.

The worst thing is they do all look the same with the chino's, brogues etc. etc. going in. It's basically full of middle class wankers who are probably reading this


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 9, 2015)

alfajobrob said:


> Can I just fess up now - I work next door to M16
> 
> I've chucked my CV over the wall, applied online and all sorts but they won't have me. I'd happily work for them if they signed a contract promising not to kill me, tie me up in a bag and tell my mum that I like to wear women's clothes.
> 
> The worst thing is they do all look the same with the chino's, brogues etc. etc. going in. It's basically full of middle class wankers who are probably reading this



The real wrong'uns are the ones who wear blazers with jeans and tan hush puppies. Boss-class spook scum!


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

nah, protestors dont go to mi5 bc its too close to home and  because they love to follow that "student" samba band (being students a long time some ogf that lot) and the bike with the four songs, mi5 also run the free party scene, the culture and the counter culture and a shit load of lawyers. dennis healey was a cia asset. blah blah , both that ALARM warning and that seamus colligans blog deleted now, the green and black cross is a mass information gathering thing run by camden mi5 , students are all spies , mi5 portico would be a wonderful place to be kettled,  exploit the fractions between spooks and pigs , ie the biggest cop hating agent provs being MI5 , and the bloody livestreamers they are all state too . blah blah , and loads of people on this board. the green gathering , thats mi5 , seeds for change (consensus trainers) and the like all mi5, as is no dash for gas/climate camp/ reclaim the power - blah blah. occupy movement thats secret state, blah blah dont care.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

Police hunt lawyer now far-left activist after offensive demo graffiti 

Police accused of brutality as fracking protester is left 'battered and bruised'

An Occupy protester's story: 'an idea can not be evicted'

theyre all state , can the editor please ban me and remove all my posts please, they are not revealent to student occupations.  cheers


----------



## gosub (Dec 9, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> The real wrong'uns are the ones who wear blazers with jeans and tan hush puppies. Boss-class spook scum!


No it beards you have to watch out for, they shave them off when not undercover so they can go down tesco unmolested.  never trust anyone with a beard - especially girls.


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> The real wrong'uns are the ones who wear blazers with jeans and tan hush puppies. Boss-class spook scum!



I've actually tried to do that "middle management" look for my job - but I just can't pull it off, I feel like an imposter


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 9, 2015)

gosub said:


> No it beards you have to watch out for, they shave them off when not undercover so they can go down tesco unmolested.  never trust anyone with a beard - especially girls.



Looks in mirror, makes note to distrust self from now on.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 9, 2015)

alfajobrob said:


> I've actually tried to do that "middle management" look for my job - but I just can't pull it off, I feel like an imposter



I think you require the breezy self-confidence that only a private education can instil.


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> Police hunt lawyer now far-left activist after offensive demo graffiti
> 
> Police accused of brutality as fracking protester is left 'battered and bruised'
> 
> ...



Please don't ban him.

He should be kept - I'd like to hear more of these student occupations and what have you*!

Youngsters and there jolly japes 



*writes notes


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

'Jonnie Marbles': the comedian and activist who attacked Rupert Murdoch

Greenpeace protesters reach summit of The Shard in London - BBC News

Occupy London protesters free themselves from St Paul's Cathedral pulpit

George Barda | The Guardian

mostly bloody state. its riddled. now please ban me and remover these post they could contravene section 68A of the terroism act


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> 'Jonnie Marbles': the comedian and activist who attacked Rupert Murdoch
> 
> Greenpeace protesters reach summit of The Shard in London - BBC News
> 
> ...



Your not going anywhere son...your urbanz now!


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 9, 2015)

THE SECRET STATE USES CHUGGERS (CHARITY MUGGERS) CHARITY FUNDRAISERS) to stake out town centres that dont have integrated CCTV systems


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 9, 2015)

Wilf said:


> First time I saw it (jazzhands) in practice was the g8 camp at stirling, 2005, but it predates that I'm sure.


We jazzhandsed the shit out of it in the 90s, brar


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> We jazzhandsed the shit out of it in the 90s, brar



Can I ask the context?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Dec 9, 2015)

What the fuck is jazz hands?


----------



## J Ed (Dec 9, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> THE SECRET STATE USES CHUGGERS (CHARITY MUGGERS) CHARITY FUNDRAISERS) to stake out town centres that dont have integrated CCTV systems



You can't just list all the people you don't like and call them spies


----------



## two sheds (Dec 9, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> What the fuck is jazz hands?


----------



## free spirit (Dec 9, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> We jazzhandsed the shit out of it in the 90s, brar


IIRC it was spread via the earth first network in the 90s, at least that's where I first came across it, though I suspect it originates with elements of the 60s hippy movement in the US.

I think People's Global Action were using it in the 90s at their gatherings, which then presumably got taken back to the various groups and countries involved. I'm not sure which of the countries / groups introduced it to PGA in the first place though.

They were also the networks that were largely infiltrated by the undercover police, so I guess there is some association between jazz hands and police infiltration, but it'd not be right to see the undercovers as propagating it or that it's particularly useful for them (consensus decision making would potentially give them the ability to block actions they didn't want to see happen, but mostly that wasn't their MO).


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Dec 9, 2015)

two sheds said:


>



The Intersectionalistas have taken this way too far now.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 9, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> What the fuck is jazz hands?


shake your hands in the air to indicate agreement rather than clapping, or making noise to indicate approval, so that people can indicate what they think of a proposal without interupting or drowning out the person speaking.

It's a pretty sensible concept for big meetings, but looks pretty silly.


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

free spirit said:


> IIRC it was spread via the earth first network in the 90s, at least that's where I first came across it, though I suspect it originates with elements of the 60s hippy movement in the US.
> 
> I think People's Global Action were using it in the 90s at their gatherings, which then presumably got taken back to the various groups and countries involved. I'm not sure which of the countries / groups introduced it to PGA in the first place though.
> 
> They were also the networks that were largely infiltrated by the undercover police, so I guess there is some association between jazz hands and police infiltration, but it'd not be right to see the undercovers as propagating it or that it's particularly useful for them (consensus decision making would potentially give them the ability to block actions they didn't want to see happen, but mostly that wasn't their MO).



Lol and what the fuck are they?

ENGLISH motherfuckers!


Edit explained above in other post by FS.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 9, 2015)

free spirit said:


> shake your hands in the air to indicate agreement rather than clapping, or making noise to indicate approval, so that people can indicate what they think of a proposal without interupting or drowning out the person speaking.
> 
> It's a pretty sensible concept for big meetings, but looks pretty silly.


Like deaf people clapping, then.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 9, 2015)

What is the sound of one hand agreeing?


----------



## JimW (Dec 9, 2015)

Morning after DTs make you look really affable.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 9, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Like deaf people clapping, then.


oh yeah, exactly like that - must be where it came from in the first place then.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 9, 2015)

J Ed said:


> You can't just list all the people you don't like and call them spies



John Terry - what a massive fucking spy that bloke is.


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

Wilf said:


> What is the sound of one hand agreeing?



Masturbation thread is t'other way......


----------



## Wilf (Dec 9, 2015)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> John Terry - what a massive fucking spy that bloke is.


The give away is that even when he's not being a spy, he turns up in his spy strip.


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 9, 2015)

[QUOTE=" but looks pretty silly.[/QUOTE]

No shit - unless it's for a deaf conference then they are a bunch of fucking muppets.


----------



## gosub (Dec 9, 2015)

J Ed said:


> You can't just list all the people you don't like and call them spies


A tried and tested method, that has worked for centuries (historically most of them had beards too)


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

this consensus training can make you some serious money! https://www.duedil.com/company/04213118/seeds-for-change-lancaster-co-operative-ltd these guys have 40k !! of course they are member of Radical Routes - Radical Routes - A network of Housing Co-ops, Workers Co-ops and Social Centres which seemingly just consists mainly of similar training organizations,and emma fordham (weirdigans) organizations, who was a member of the finance committee of occupy, and consistenty used Consensus Democracy, and Process,and safe spaces to shoot down good ideas,requests for dosh and when that wasnt practicable- always pushing for peopkle to use foot print co op for printing, based at cornostone in leeds (think iv read that leeds was a testbed pilot for many undercover tactics later used elsewhere  just didnt do them.IE the theyre org in oxford directed by one hannah lewis, active in NDFG - and who is keeping this Frequently Asked Questions | AT Coop activist tat co operative online (how do i see that) also with a contact address at cornerstone.  - now the housing co ops that radical routes support -are they possibbly full of ex infiltrators into the green movement?  all veggie veggie, very green entryist, see also big  green gathering etc (which was of course shut down due to the efforts of mark kennedy stealing all the money for the bar) no evidence of course but, hmm


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> this consensus training can make you some serious money! https://www.duedil.com/company/04213118/seeds-for-change-lancaster-co-operative-ltd these guys have 40k !! of course they are member of Radical Routes - Radical Routes - A network of Housing Co-ops, Workers Co-ops and Social Centres which seemingly just consists mainly of similar training organizations,and emma fordham (weirdigans) organizations, who was a member of the finance committee of occupy, and consistenty used Consensus Democracy, and Process,and safe spaces to shoot down good ideas,requests for dosh and when that wasnt practicable- always pushing for peopkle to use foot print co op for printing, based at cornostone in leeds (think iv read that leeds was a testbed pilot for many undercover tactics later used elsewhere  just didnt do them.IE the theyre org in oxford directed by one hannah lewis, active in NDFG - and who is keeping this Frequently Asked Questions | AT Coop activist tat co operative online (how do i see that) also with a contact address at cornerstone.  - now the housing co ops that radical routes support -are they possibbly full of ex infiltrators into the green movement?  all veggie veggie, very green entryist, see also big  green gathering etc (which was of course shut down due to the efforts of mark kennedy stealing all the money for the bar) no evidence of course but, hmm



Did you say Mark Kennedy?



I love the kid at the end.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

other cops/spies called mark i know, mark weaver , mark(marek)cichon, mark edwards (ironically the only person named and charged of the 50 arrested at million mask march...


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

mark means dedicated to the god of war doesnt it? and mark machray but hes mi6 and pretty cool, good drinker


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 10, 2015)




----------



## DrRingDing (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> this consensus training can make you some serious money! https://www.duedil.com/company/04213118/seeds-for-change-lancaster-co-operative-ltd these guys have 40k !! of course they are member of Radical Routes - Radical Routes - A network of Housing Co-ops, Workers Co-ops and Social Centres which seemingly just consists mainly of similar training organizations,and emma fordham (weirdigans) organizations, who was a member of the finance committee of occupy, and consistenty used Consensus Democracy, and Process,and safe spaces to shoot down good ideas,requests for dosh and when that wasnt practicable- always pushing for peopkle to use foot print co op for printing, based at cornostone in leeds (think iv read that leeds was a testbed pilot for many undercover tactics later used elsewhere  just didnt do them.IE the theyre org in oxford directed by one hannah lewis, active in NDFG - and who is keeping this Frequently Asked Questions | AT Coop activist tat co operative online (how do i see that) also with a contact address at cornerstone.  - now the housing co ops that radical routes support -are they possibbly full of ex infiltrators into the green movement?  all veggie veggie, very green entryist, see also big  green gathering etc (which was of course shut down due to the efforts of mark kennedy stealing all the money for the bar) no evidence of course but, hmm



Can anyone verify this kingfisher cunt? As they are blatantly state.


----------



## DrRingDing (Dec 10, 2015)

I maybe tipsy but who the fuck is this cock wipe?


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

yes please delete everything i have written please as it is not on topic of student occupations please, and ban me,


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

it may contravene section68A of the terrorism act


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

ask your Super Hierarchical Agent mates who i am doctor, though i suspect you already do


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 10, 2015)

Can someone "like" that Mark Kennedy goal post pls and therefore validate my life....It's not a lot to ask 

Cheers


----------



## DrRingDing (Dec 10, 2015)

What shower of cunts have just rocked up?


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 10, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> What shower of cunts have just rocked up?



Fuck you - speak for yourself...fucking noob.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> this consensus training can make you some serious money! https://www.duedil.com/company/04213118/seeds-for-change-lancaster-co-operative-ltd these guys have 40k !! of course they are member of Radical Routes - Radical Routes - A network of Housing Co-ops, Workers Co-ops and Social Centres which seemingly just consists mainly of similar training organizations,and emma fordham (weirdigans) organizations, who was a member of the finance committee of occupy, and consistenty used Consensus Democracy, and Process,and safe spaces to shoot down good ideas,requests for dosh and when that wasnt practicable- always pushing for peopkle to use foot print co op for printing, based at cornostone in leeds (think iv read that leeds was a testbed pilot for many undercover tactics later used elsewhere  just didnt do them.IE the theyre org in oxford directed by one hannah lewis, active in NDFG - and who is keeping this Frequently Asked Questions | AT Coop activist tat co operative online (how do i see that) also with a contact address at cornerstone.  - now the housing co ops that radical routes support -are they possibbly full of ex infiltrators into the green movement?  all veggie veggie, very green entryist, see also big  green gathering etc (which was of course shut down due to the efforts of mark kennedy stealing all the money for the bar) no evidence of course but, hmm



You seem to have a lot of information on people.


----------



## BigTom (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> this consensus training can make you some serious money! https://www.duedil.com/company/04213118/seeds-for-change-lancaster-co-operative-ltd these guys have 40k !! of course they are member of Radical Routes - Radical Routes - A network of Housing Co-ops, Workers Co-ops and Social Centres which seemingly just consists mainly of similar training organizations,and emma fordham (weirdigans) organizations, who was a member of the finance committee of occupy, and consistenty used Consensus Democracy, and Process,and safe spaces to shoot down good ideas,requests for dosh and when that wasnt practicable- always pushing for peopkle to use foot print co op for printing, based at cornostone in leeds (think iv read that leeds was a testbed pilot for many undercover tactics later used elsewhere  just didnt do them.IE the theyre org in oxford directed by one hannah lewis, active in NDFG - and who is keeping this Frequently Asked Questions | AT Coop activist tat co operative online (how do i see that) also with a contact address at cornerstone.  - now the housing co ops that radical routes support -are they possibbly full of ex infiltrators into the green movement?  all veggie veggie, very green entryist, see also big  green gathering etc (which was of course shut down due to the efforts of mark kennedy stealing all the money for the bar) no evidence of course but, hmm


Are there any of these kind of left radical/ radical liberal groups that you think are genuine or is it all state?

Radical routes I only know vaguely but of course they are just consultancy stuff, that's what they do, help people setup co-ops. 

Gbc has helped more activists than I can count over the past 5 years, I'd not be surprised if there was a police somewhere in the organisation but the org as a whole is not state and should be trusted, that kind of talk could see someone ignore the bust card and talk to police, get a shit brief and get convicted rather than getting off. Accusations need evidence because of the consequences that a wrong accusation might have.


----------



## tufty79 (Dec 10, 2015)

JimW said:


> Of course the hippies were part of COINTELPRO


Two of them (kennedy's climate camp/ now undercover research/Euro antifracking activists) Leeds mates), probably are.

 Destroyed my life, then didn't like me talking about them and what they did to me. and then got me  mysteriously arrested after one of them gave services false info about me. The coppers went mysteriously off radar about the video statement I was meant to make about the one that raped me, and I have never been told why they dropped it like a stone after leaving my house and going back to hq. I know some of the people kingfisher is referring to and thinkin he is bang on with those two.


----------



## tufty79 (Dec 10, 2015)

BigTom said:


> Are there any of these kind of left radical/ radical liberal groups that you think are genuine or is it all state?
> 
> Radical routes I only know vaguely but of course they are just consultancy stuff, that's what they do, help people setup co-ops.
> 
> Gbc has helped more activists than I can count over the past 5 years, I'd not be surprised if there was a police somewhere in the organisation but the org as a whole is not state and should be trusted, that kind of talk could see someone ignore the bust card and talk to police, get a shit brief and get convicted rather than getting off. Accusations need evidence because of the consequences that a wrong accusation might have.


Radical routes were horrified that I reported my rape and experience of fraud and abuse to the police,and they continue to support my rapist. They are also financially corrupt as hell, from what I saw when I was a member.

Sorry to burst your happy bubble


----------



## tufty79 (Dec 10, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> Can anyone verify this kingfisher cunt? As they are blatantly state.


I can. From a few years back. Fuck you.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

No, this person Kingfisher is a liability. At best, and most charitably, they're really fucking thick or currently quite mentally ill, at worst they're being purposefully disruptive.

They are spouting complete bollocks which at root has no any basis in fact to back up the main accusations.

They're mixing up some political criticisms, personal gripes, accusations of working for the State, and a whole host of bits of facts with a loads of lies and misunderstandings.

This stuff is really, really fucking serious, and not to be fucking messed around with like this.

They are also posting peoples' personal details and names on line with very, very serious allegations not backed up with any evidence at all.

Can their posts be deleted and them banned please editor?


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

tufty79 said:


> Two of them (kennedy's climate camp/ now undercover research/Euro antifracking activists) Leeds mates), probably are.
> 
> Destroyed my life, then didn't like me talking about them and what they did to me. and then got me  mysteriously arrested after one of them gave services false info about me. The coppers went mysteriously off radar about the video statement I was meant to make about the one that raped me, and I have never been told why they dropped it like a stone after leaving my house and going back to hq. I know some of the people kingfisher is referring to and thinkin he is bang on with those two.



Sorry, you're wrong and you need to stop making statements like 'probably are' so glibly. Made again, WITH NO EVIDENCE, but personal/political issues and dislike. Which while justified is NOT a basis for accusing people of being State assets.

I know the facts behind your story, and while the events are true and your feeling of anger justified, the conclusions you are leaping to are confused and incorrect, and you need to stop posting inaccurate stuff like this.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

do you honestly think their are any "serious" people on the left that would "do damage" to any of these infiltrators. Yeah, sorry i have been about for the last 5 years and their bloody aint, aint no one.maybe a decade ago.   , i have been in a mental hospital yes, thanks for noticing. , and they tried to goad encourage me to admit i had tendency for violence with information THEY COULDV ONLY GOT FROM THE POLICE/ SECURITY SERVICES. i was arrested in 2013 and they tried to make out i had heroin on me, amongst other things, i was locked up on election day for "delusions of being a journalist+knocking a park keepers hat off, and talking about ted heath and his mysteriously sunken morning cloud" got out after a week, as i said i was affecting illness to escape crimes (3 common assaults) it works- as for real protest groups - not sure - OCCUPY , and things using their accoutrements - occupy goldsmiths occupy soas and hand jiving, v. suspect of - some of the drugs ones are real, involved with cista, but the problem is they have to find berths for all these UCs they have created - mark kennedy was by no means the only Green Entryist , theres still a lot of them ,. probably living in these radical routes housing co ops - Yeah im throwing grenades ,. So what? what groups are you involved in Lynn, because these demands for evidence are familiar to me - evidence that you cant say what form it would take, and non would do for you probably - i know theres no bloody  nutting squad for anarchists because iv looked and looked and your top anarchists couldnt care less- bit man who was thursday-. i have my team and though pitchford/cops/URG have declared mi5 verboten, we havent- thanks tufty top notch, theres a set of real life and  forum behaviours that are recognizable across politcs/places - and the lawyers - the bloody lawyers , keir starmer represented a spy cop! your HJAs and your Kaim Todners and your Bindmans KNOW they represent secret police sometimes! and the judges know, feel free to ban and delete me, but yeah sorry lynne you look like a spook from where im sitting, as is aka psuedonym as is rutita1


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

no fan of CKAD btw , burnt his hat - but he admits to being MI7! all these bloody livestreamers, and mrs and ukwatching on the livestreams


----------



## NoXion (Dec 10, 2015)

The cops/security services/shape-shifting Reptilians from Draco IV don't need to infiltrate and replace the entire membership of leftist organisations with Pod People in order to disrupt them. Baseless accusations and divisive attitudes can do the job for them.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

this blokes spooky - climate camp , jumping off a building caught up with him afterwards said some od od stuff


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

this blokes a spooky fella, the whole g8 j13 beak street was dodgy, people furiously polishing cutlery and stirring vegan fare, yum, v. little politics.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

ban and remove posts please section68A of of terrorism act - come talk to me, il be in a lawn chair outside MI5 drinking tinnies with a petition or something brian haw style! #ibelievebarbara


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 10, 2015)

Could a mod move all the "state asset" bullshit into a separate thread.


----------



## BigTom (Dec 10, 2015)

tufty79 said:


> Radical routes were horrified that I reported my rape and experience of fraud and abuse to the police,and they continue to support my rapist. They are also financially corrupt as hell, from what I saw when I was a member.
> 
> Sorry to burst your happy bubble


 like I said, I only know radical routes vaguely, there's no happy bubble to burst, just saying that them only doing consultancy type stuff isn't suspicious at all. The things you experienced are clearly horrendous and mean I wouldn't want to be involved with them, but don't mean they are state. I've been shocked by how badly left groups in general handle rape/sexual abuse issues in the past few years, but that's also true of wider society, I don't think it needs police or security services involvement to make it happen.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

FFS, one of the biggest indictment of the shitty-ness of the activist left is not the use of 'jazz hands' or the fact lots of people eat vegan food, but the fact that people that spout this kind of conspiracy shit get given more time than they should have.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

OBVIOUS SPY IS OBVIOUS


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

Obviously mentally unwell poster is obvious. Go away.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 10, 2015)

WTF.

Spooks turned up at ny mums house once because she did some agency work for General Dynamics, factory nurse or whatever you call it these days.
 As she's a member of amnesty campaign against the arms trade etc etc.
 when the spooks told her this shed thanked them for letting her know and wouldn't be going back .
As she hadn't realized it was an arms manufacturer.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

yep, ask for evidence (which cant be described, or even imagined, ) - appeal to other spys to SHUT IT DOWN, resort to playing mental health card - thats how it goes.


----------



## bimble (Dec 10, 2015)

Yesterday I thought this thread couldn't get much depressinger.
Or maybe I'm just sad because I never got recruited, even though I ate loads of that veggie stew and everything.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

ha, we had one lad , from the north come in to the squat - obviously read up on the hippie vegan fascists. was all like just gonna go shoplifting - what you shoplifting - vegan stuff - cool , he was on the blts within a week, nice lad bit too much theory


----------



## BigTom (Dec 10, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> FFS, one of the biggest indictment of the shitty-ness of the activist left is not the use of 'jazz hands' or the fact lots of people eat vegan food, but the fact that people that spout this kind of conspiracy shit get given more time than they should have.



I was accused of being state, using delta mind control tricks etc, by right libertarian conspiraloons at occupy Birmingham. Laughable really, and was very much seen as being so. My main offence was to tell one of them to "fuck off, racist" when they posted up a link to the protocols on a fb group or page I think.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

well theres your problem - OCCUPY - that was when it was down by the peace gardens? fuck that ohkrana secret service forgery


----------



## BigTom (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> well theres your problem - OCCUPY - that was when it was down by the peace gardens? fuck that ohkrana secret service forgery



Nah, when it was in Victoria Square before the onset of the Christmas market forced the move to the peace gardens.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

well fuck conspiraloon stuff like that - although im not sure if the VIPaedos stuff is conspiracaloon stuff again now but for a while it wasnt, but before that it was, and i guess there is *something^ to be said for a plurality of voices on social media? at #olsx they had that sewn up pretty damn quick , seize the comms and the money innit


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

To engage with this more seriously for a moment... kingfisher I think there are proper political criticisms for some of what you bring up here, and I (and others) have similar concerns around some of the things you mention like the use of consensus and counter-cultural dominance in radical circles.

The problem I have is one where you've taken these criticisms and then made a massive and irrational leap of logic to then calling people State assets.

That is problematic on a number of levels, one of which is that you _actually_ damage legitimate political critique of these things by making any and all criticism look bonkers.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

ah proper, and legitimate,youv changed tack , its called throwing grenades , see what floats up, a rattling trees , see what falls down. OF COURSE - some interesting stuff popping up in the PMs. BUT if we are to treat the mi5 as a black box (its secret so we cant know, but your speculation based on observation just CANT be true it sounds too mad, they suuuurely wouldnt do that) - and are told explicitly that UNDERCOVER COPS, POLICE are the only ones subverting our protests (by COPS UCG PITCHFORD)-if you look at the rejects from pitchford, theres a bloke who had a NAMED EXPOSED MI5 agent in his group but still excluded because #spyspy rather than #spycop - even to the exclusion of the corporte spooks covered in lubbers - where are we? they are subverting the movements whether its thames house or the yard - the bit in undercover, NY meeting that was "start of the OWS protests" that mk attended - and their taking the mi5 at their word that they dont subvert uk domestic protests anymore. really, well they still employ journalists (from most papers) - and i doubt they create their online legends on their own. this forums alright, but its pretty lacking (like everywhere) on whats been going on post 2010 protest wise, its a pivot, phase out the green entryist cops, phase in the mi5 and corporates - student demos 2010 - the kids stuck with it and went to jail for the riots next year, and most of the wanker students went on to be twitter intersectionalistas and novara and huff post columnists(most of whom have me blocked for asking if they are agents LOL) and the biggest fear of this lot? your MI5 - its not terrorism, its whistleblowers? how long since shaylor? ages, were due some more... the problem is if we told the WHOLE truth, wed probably condemn a bunch of our friends as well, the raped by the state bit? you know those awful police having sex with activist women - well they solved that by providing every male copper with a female secret agent, thats the new pattern amongs the milleau, foreign or british. i know about this stuff, iv taken drugs with these people, and the lawyers? the ones on the bust cards, they know, because they aint shocked when you tell em , and the guardian? they bloody know. and its alright, knowing people are spys because if they are committing crimes then you can to, if they tell you a squat is a sure thing with a nod and a wink you know it is , and you know the cops aint gonna smash the door in immediately. messed up, drives you mad, but thats what happened to haw, he had some CRAZY ideas about the secret state. but we dont address that. nah


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 10, 2015)

Dude - just use a thing called paragraphs.

It will help you look slightly less deranged and make reading your posts a little easier. I doubt it will aid with the comprehension though.

Cheers


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

To give you some unsolicited for advice kingfisher...

I know you're convinced all this stuff is true at the moment (although in my experience people spouting this stuff do on one level know they're fixated on it because they're unwell and it's a symptom of their issues) but whether it is or isn't true, continuing to act in this way and post this type of stuff online is really not OK behavior, both for the people you're accusing without evidence, but also FOR YOU as amongst other damaging things it's reinforcing some weird dynamics that perpetuate your current mental state.

Seriously, get off the internet and go and sort yourself out a bit.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> ah proper, and legitimate,youv changed tack , its called throwing grenades , see what floats up, a rattling trees , see what falls down. OF COURSE - some interesting stuff popping up in the PMs. BUT if we are to treat the mi5 as a black box (its secret so we cant know, but your speculation based on observation just CANT be true it sounds too mad, they suuuurely wouldnt do that) - and are told explicitly that UNDERCOVER COPS, POLICE are the only ones subverting our protests (by COPS UCG PITCHFORD)-if you look at the rejects from pitchford, theres a bloke who had a NAMED EXPOSED MI5 agent in his group but still excluded because #spyspy rather than #spycop - even to the exclusion of the corporte spooks covered in lubbers - where are we? they are subverting the movements whether its thames house or the yard - the bit in undercover, NY meeting that was "start of the OWS protests" that mk attended - and their taking the mi5 at their word that they dont subvert uk domestic protests anymore. really, well they still employ journalists (from most papers) - and i doubt they create their online legends on their own. this forums alright, but its pretty lacking (like everywhere) on whats been going on post 2010 protest wise, its a pivot, phase out the green entryist cops, phase in the mi5 and corporates - student demos 2010 - the kids stuck with it and went to jail for the riots next year, and most of the wanker students went on to be twitter intersectionalistas and novara and huff post columnists(most of whom have me blocked for asking if they are agents LOL) and the biggest fear of this lot? your MI5 - its not terrorism, its whistleblowers? how long since shaylor? ages, were due some more... the problem is if we told the WHOLE truth, wed probably condemn a bunch of our friends as well, the raped by the state bit? you know those awful police having sex with activist women - well they solved that by providing every male copper with a female secret agent, thats the new pattern amongs the milleau, foreign or british. i know about this stuff, iv taken drugs with these people, and the lawyers? the ones on the bust cards, they know, because they aint shocked when you tell em , and the guardian? they bloody know. and its alright, knowing people are spys because if they are committing crimes then you can to, if they tell you a squat is a sure thing with a nod and a wink you know it is , and you know the cops aint gonna smash the door in immediately. messed up, drives you mad, but thats what happened to haw, he had some CRAZY ideas about the secret state. but we dont address that. nah



Do you want people to understand what you are posting and engage with it? If so please treat the other posters with a bit of respect and pay much more attention to how you present your opinions.

This relates to how it looks on the screen (e.g. try paragraphs and bullet points), your use of grammar to get your point across clearly, avoiding allusion (e.g. 'how long since shaylor) and supplying some supporting evidence (e.g. referenced sources of/links to information used).

Alternatively you could just carry on as you are; but I don't think that'll do this thread, or much more importantly you, much good.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## bimble (Dec 10, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> To give you some unsolicited for advice kingfisher...
> 
> I know you're convinced all this stuff is true at the moment (although in my experience people spouting this stuff do on one level know they're fixated on it because they're unwell and it's a symptom of their issues) but whether it is or isn't true, continuing to act in this way and post this type of stuff online is really not OK behavior, both for the people you're accusing without evidence, but also FOR YOU as amongst other damaging things it's reinforcing some weird dynamics that perpetuate your current mental state.
> 
> Seriously, get off the internet and go and sort yourself out a bit.



Really good post that. I hope you can see it kingfisher . 



kingfisher said:


> yeah sorry lynne you look like a spook from where im sitting


I don't think he's a spook honestly, I think he's trying to be helpful. Maybe try giving it the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

CHEERS GUYS CAN YOU DELETE ALL THESE POSTS AND BAN ME PLEASE IM GOING TO GO GET SECTIONED ON SATURDAY, SHIT IN MY HAND AND SMEAR IT ON MI5 OR SOMETHING,


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> CHEERS GUYS CAN YOU DELETE ALL THESE POSTS AND BAN ME PLEASE IM GOING TO GO GET SECTIONED ON SATURDAY, SHIT IN MY HAND AND SMEAR IT ON MI5 OR SOMETHING,


you'll get sectioned before that unless you do something about the caps lock.


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> CHEERS GUYS CAN YOU DELETE ALL THESE POSTS AND BAN ME PLEASE IM GOING TO GO GET SECTIONED ON SATURDAY, SHIT IN MY HAND AND SMEAR IT ON MI5 OR SOMETHING,



Seriously take care of yourself. Call a friend or anyone you know.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

Fuck knows what's going on here really, but anyway... good luck kingfisher, despite the somewhat brutal reception I hope things get sorted for you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

alfajobrob said:


> Seriously take care of yourself. Call a friend or anyone you know.


he's asked the audience already


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 10, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you'll get sectioned before that unless you do something about the caps lock.



Sorry - but lol.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Go for a long stroll around the area one day. Check out the surveillance kit on the approaches and nearby buildings. Check out the sightlines and defensible positions on the perimeter. People don't go there to protest because if they've got a strategic brain-cell in their head, it's fairly obvious that protesters would be wrapped up and kettled _tout_ fucking _suite_.



The 2010 student protest that eventually kicked off at Millwall passed MI5.  I got there late and ended up waiting outside there because I thought it might be interesting, things already seemed a bit lively and the building was open with people coming in and out and people stood around outside having a nose.  As the march got close suddenly everyone went inside and these huge metal shutters came down simaltaneuosly locking down all the entrances to the building.  it was well James Bond.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

smokedout said:


> The 2010 student protest that eventually kicked off at Millwall passed MI5.  I got there late and ended up waiting outside there because I thought it might be interesting, things already seemed a bit lively and the building was open with people coming in and out and people stood around outside having a nose.  As the march got close suddenly everyone went inside and these huge metal shutters came down simaltaneuosly locking down all the entrances to the building.  it was well James Bond.


not the new den, but millbank


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

yeah its a piece of piss to get the shutters to come down


----------



## bimble (Dec 10, 2015)

There's loads of jobs going at MI5 at the mo: 
Recruitment Services - Jobs


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> yeah its a piece of piss to get the shutters to come down



Oi - weren't you supposed to be doing something with you shitty hands?

Off you trot....


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

l;ove the go away your mental , do paragraphs, mock concern (no doubt sincere) - do you think the police have their own interception methods or do they farm it out to GCHQ? the struggle with having no encrypted way of communication is that people who will tell you quite interesting things in the noise of a rave, clam up when permanent records are likely to be kept. eh, come talk to me, im gonna do the brian haw thing outside mi5 - for kincora, ted heath, etc etc blacklisted people oh do a paragraph blah blah blah-


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

bimble said:


> There's loads of jobs going at MI5 at the mo:
> Recruitment Services - Jobs


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

nah i cant shit in my hands on command ill have to do something else


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> nah i cant shit in my hands on command ill have to do something else


have some shit in a bag - some you prepared earlier, as it were.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> not the new den, but millbank



a student protest kicking of at Millwall would be an interesting thing to see


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> l;ove the go away your mental , do paragraphs, mock concern (no doubt sincere) - do you think the police have their own interception methods or do they farm it out to GCHQ? the struggle with having no encrypted way of communication is that people who will tell you quite interesting things in the noise of a rave, clam up when permanent records are likely to be kept. eh, come talk to me, im gonna do the brian haw thing outside mi5 - for kincora, ted heath, etc etc blacklisted people oh do a paragraph blah blah blah-


yes


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2015)

smokedout said:


> a student protest kicking of at Millwall would be an interesting thing to see


----------



## bimble (Dec 10, 2015)

Anyhoo. At least the president of Goldsmiths' Islamic Society has resigned.


----------



## DrRingDing (Dec 10, 2015)

I was pissed last night but this poster needs banning for their own sanity. Not exactly ethical to let them carry on like this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> I was pissed last night but this poster needs banning for their own sanity. Not exactly ethical to let them carry on like this.


(((bimble)))


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2015)

Wilf said:


> First time I saw it (jazzhands) in practice was the g8 camp at stirling, 2005, but it predates that I'm sure.


It was being used in Earth First! at least as early as 1994.


----------



## gosub (Dec 10, 2015)

bimble said:


> Anyhoo. At least the president of Goldsmiths' Islamic Society has resigned.


The LGBTQ+ spokesperson seems to have gone quiet too, though their facebook page has taken rather a lot of abuse.  Can't imagine they will resign given the form of the others, should though, isn't just muppetry its damaging.


----------



## bimble (Dec 10, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> (((bimble)))


I wasn't even pissed last night! (I had my Mum staying over) .. Sadly it's too late for my sanities. Do plan to taper my use of this website for the good of all though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2015)

bimble said:


> Anyhoo. At least the president of Goldsmiths' Islamic Society has resigned.


To be replaced by...

Their recent mealy-mouthed statement on their (men-only) facebook page doesn't fill one with confidence. They use a statement about the resignation of their nasty cunt of a president to attack 'hate speech' from the likes of Maryam Namazie, a 'notorious Islamophobe', according to them. 



> In light of recent allegations attributed to, Muhammed Patel, a meeting was called to discuss a motion of no confidence. Soon after Muhammad tendered his resignation and it was accepted by the committee.
> 
> In the interim, the committee will appoint an acting president to serve for the remainder of the academic year.
> 
> ...


----------



## bimble (Dec 10, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> To be replaced by...
> 
> Their recent mealy-mouthed statement on their (men-only) facebook page doesn't fill one with confidence. They use a statement about the resignation of their nasty cunt of a president to attack 'hate speech' from the likes of Maryam Namazie, a 'notorious Islamophobe', according to them.



How completely depressing. "allegations,attributed to"? Guy is a complete cunt and a coward to boot (deleting his twitter account because people actually looked at it).


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 10, 2015)

bimble said:


> I wasn't even pissed last night! (I had my Mum staying over) .. Sadly it's too late for my sanities. Do plan to taper my use of this website for the good of all though.



I was trollied and am rapidly approaching the same state now - it's an official work (M16) day off though so no probs


----------



## bimble (Dec 10, 2015)

alfajobrob said:


> I was trollied and am rapidly approaching the same state now - it's an official work (M16) day off though so no probs


Shaken not stirred?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2015)

bimble said:


> How completely depressing. "allegations,attributed to"? Guy is a complete cunt and a coward to boot (delating his twitter because people actually looked at it).


And no apology. No distancing from his statements. Just using this statement as an opportunity to repeat the lies about Namazie.


----------



## bimble (Dec 10, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And no apology. No distancing from his statements. Just using this statement as an opportunity to repeat the lies about Namazie.


On the plus side, at least a lot of people were (I imagine) able to see some things as a direct result of this particular sideshow - I mean her actual speech in that room was about exactly what happened to her in there. You couldn't make it up etc.
Something I'd really like to know is about the little stream of female muslim students who left the room en masse about 15 minutes into the talk. Did they leave because they objected to the behaviour of the front row ?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2015)

bimble said:


> On the plus side, at least a lot of people were (I imagine) able to see some things as a direct result of this particular sideshow - I mean her actual speech in that room was about exactly what happened to her in there. You couldn't make it up etc.
> Something I'd really like to know is about the little stream of female muslim students who left the room en masse about 15 minutes into the talk. Did they leave because they objected to the behaviour of the front row ?


Who knows? And we won't find out from their public facebook page because only the men post on it. Great stuff, eh, FemSoc.


----------



## alfajobrob (Dec 10, 2015)

bimble said:


> Shaken not stirred?



If only - I'm not sure James Bond would require a removal van for empty tins of Tyskie and Scrumpy Jack in his living room. I was banging on the cocktails last night, but probably looked more like Del boy tbf.


----------



## bimble (Dec 10, 2015)

alfajobrob said:


> If only - I'm not sure James Bond would require a removal van for empty tins of Tyskie and Scrumpy Jack in his living room. I was banging on the cocktails last night, but probably looked more like Del boy tbf.


Well no wonder you didn't get recruited then


----------



## likesfish (Dec 10, 2015)

Apprantly some of the female muslim students wanted to debate her afterwards but decided to get out of dodge because of the "brothers" actions 

Mi5 let James bond blow it up in their films so the real ira thought We will have some of that fired an anti tank weapon at the building didnt in break an upper story window not even an rpg7 a more modern Laws rocket


----------



## gosub (Dec 10, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Apprantly some of the female muslim students wanted to debate her afterwards but decided to get out of dodge because of the "brothers" actions
> 
> Mi5 let James bond blow it up in their films so the real ira thought We will have some of that fired an anti tank weapon at the building didnt in break an upper story window not even an rpg7 a more modern Laws rocket


SIS ain't Mi5, other side of the river.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

chilango said:


> It was being used in Earth First! at least as early as 1994.



Side issue, but are you sure? I was very involved in those circles across the country then and never saw it at all until the PGA gatherings started a few years later. The nearest I saw was a Native American who visited to talk about indigenous resistance to coal mining in North America and use a talking stick that got taken up by some of the more hippie inclined elements. No doubt they'd all be hauled up for cultural appropriation today.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2015)

yeah europeans should use the conch :nods wisely:


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

Native Americans used the talking stick. Anti-road camps used the talking empty can of strong lager.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2015)

EF in the US did at the time at their _moots _- that, i think is how it came over here.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> EF in the US did at the time at their _moots _- that, i think is how it came over here.



Hate to be a pedant, but EF! in the US never had Moots, that was a UK EF! invention. The US EF! lot had a Round River Rendezvous in the summer, and then a Winter Organizers conference (that didn't happen every year) which I never saw hand signals at.

I'm pretty sure it came largely via the European green/small NGO scene via the PGA and Zapatista inspired stuff in about 1995/6. It may have been about a little before then, but I don't think it was used in any widespread way until the late '90s.

FFS, my life is over, discussing the origin of those stupid hand signals.  Anyway, why are we even discussing this, don't we know they_ actually_ come from MI5/6?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2015)

Fucking hell, _moots_, I'd forgotten moots!


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Hate to be a pedant, but EF! in the US never had Moots, that was a UK EF! invention. The US EF! lot had a Round River Rendezvous in the summer, and then a Winter Organizers conference (that didn't happen every year).
> 
> I'm pretty sure it came largely via the European green/small NGO scene via the PGA and Zapatista inspired stuff in about 1995/6. It may have been about a little before then, but I don't think it was used in any widespread way until the late '90s.
> 
> FFS, my life is over, discussing the origin of those stupid hand signals.


Gathering/whatever - Pretty sure chilango here went to the infamous NA EF thing stalked by a bear.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

I can think of a number of EF! events where I'd have welcomed a savage bear running amok in the meetings.
<Hippies getting ripped to shreds emoticon>

(I suspect a number of us on here know each other irl.)


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2015)

FWIW, the few times I've seen it in action on a large scale - climate camp and g8 mass meetings - were some of the most structured meetings I've ever seen (certainly in terms of following a pre-set agenda).  A bit less so when used in meetings of 20 or 30.  The shake hands thing does maybe allow some people who might not want to _speak_ to make a contribution, but doesn't itself solve all the power issues.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2015)

Wilf said:


> FWIW, the few times I've seen it in action on a large scale - climate camp and g8 mass meetings - were some of the most structured meetings I've ever seen (certainly in terms of following a pre-set agenda).  A bit less so when used in meetings of 20 or 30.  The shake hands thing does maybe allow some people who might not want to _speak_ to make a contribution, but doesn't itself solve all the power issues.


It can even accentuate them. The only mass meeting (300+) i've ever been at where it was used was effectively taken over by those familiar with the rigmarole.

But blimey, i didn't expect to be talking about this stuff ever again.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

Wilf said:


> FWIW, the few times I've seen it in action on a large scale - climate camp and g8 mass meetings - were some of the most structured meetings I've ever seen (certainly in terms of following a pre-set agenda).  A bit less so when used in meetings of 20 or 30.  The shake hands thing does maybe allow some people who might not want to _speak_ to make a contribution, but doesn't itself solve all the power issues.



Yeah, I agree. I've seen them used really well sometimes too, but like you say, they're not a magic bullet obviously. Although actually the largest meeting with the widest participation I've seen (around 900 people) didn't use them at all, but was incredibly well structured and with brutally tight facilitation.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

I do think the fetish of consensus and process and how it can be used to stifle minority (and often more radical views) is an interesting and useful topic for discussion, but probably for another thread/day/lifetime.

(And actually not entirely unrelated to the issues around 'safe spaces' and topics that this thread has touched on.)


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

https://www.duedil.com/company/02738104/catalyst-collective-limited/people
https://www.duedil.com/company/05107548/seeds-for-change-oxford-collective-ltd/people
https://www.duedil.com/company/04213118/seeds-for-change-lancaster-co-operative-ltd

ok so the earliest of these companies - lancaster seeds for change emerges at 2001 and had an injection of 20k in 2011 - (when i first came across them when v. dodgy (from 1st hand,them fucking up projects- name of mark weaver from leeds)  starts bigging up hannah from SfC also No Dash for Gas for these trainings at occupy london. does anyone recognize any names that are dodgy here? how is their an appetite for these many trainings from all these organizations supplying identical services pushing this flawed model. It is the way that the students (with their red square everywhere- well within the UoL, they dont like to play with the ex polys) organize, and claim it was successful in amsterdam. Just like the occupy london claimed to take it from 15M in spain. the above musings have been really useful, cheers.
By the By, gwan london tommorrow, gonna take a walk around goldsmiths and put some of my already made posters up, i had them already made but didnt look "goldsmiths" enough last time and we just drank some super lagers on a bench: but iv washed my hair
The posters say something like "think your student politicians are WANKERS? look deeper they are probably SPIES #studentsnotspooks and with this power vacuum might be able to strike up some conversations and get kicked out, i have a squat i can crash at in new cross because im abreast of the modern developments so wouldnt be out of my way. cheers guys, PMs welcome . 
Consensus democracy (jazz hands) is shit and also sinister...


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Side issue, but are you sure? I was very involved in those circles across the country then and never saw it at all until the PGA gatherings started a few years later. The nearest I saw was a Native American who visited to talk about indigenous resistance to coal mining in North America and use a talking stick that got taken up by some of the more hippie inclined elements. No doubt they'd all be hauled up for cultural appropriation today.



100%.

I remember taking a couple of AFA types to an EF! Meeting c. 94/95 at a squatted social centre in Cardiff and their disgust/disbelief at seeing the spectacle of jazz hands for the first time. I wasn't shocked, which suggests I'd already been desensitised to its use even earlier.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

Maybe it was a special Wales thing?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

chilango said:


> 100%.
> 
> I remember taking a couple of AFA types to an EF! Meeting c. 94/95 at a squatted social centre in Cardiff and their disgust/disbelief at seeing the spectacle of jazz hands for the first time. I wasn't shocked, which suggests I'd already been desensitised to its use even earlier.


(((chilango)))


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> gonna take a walk around goldsmiths and put some of my already made posters up


i think you should make them while posting them up


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Gathering/whatever - Pretty sure chilango here went to the infamous NA EF thing stalked by a bear.



I did not. Stop repeating this _slur.
_
I used to stalk bears, not the other way round.

Apart from that one time in Alaska....

...nowt to do with EF! Though, it happened to be a SWPie eating chocolate - against the rules - in our tent.

But anyway....


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Maybe it was a special Wales thing?



Doubt it. There were barely any Welsh people there!

I suspect it was cos of the liberal Rainbow Gathering student types who'd initially set the EF! Group prior to the influx of anarchos/ex-trots that changed its character somewhat.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

chilango said:


> Doubt it. There were barely any Welsh people there!
> 
> I suspect it was cos of the liberal Rainbow Gathering student types who'd initially set the EF! Group prior to the influx of anarchos/ex-trots that changed its character somewhat.



Yeah, in fact the Rainbow Gathering thing was one of the names that I was trying to remember when I was thinking about the migration of the hand signals thing from Europe to the UK. They used them, and there was a bit of an overlap between that scene and the Euro-greenie scene in the mid-'90s, and then the PGA increased that.

I think we should just agree to blame the Euro hippies.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Yeah, in fact the Rainbow Gathering thing was one of the names that I was trying to remember when I was thinking about the migration of the hand signals thing from Europe to the UK. They used them, and there was a bit of an overlap between that scene and the Euro-greenie scene in the mid-'90s, and then the PGA increased that.
> 
> I think we should just agree to blame the Euro hippies.


i bet it was an innovation from an undercover cop in an attempt to undermine subversives by making them appear alien


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2015)

chilango said:


> I did not. Stop repeating this _slur.
> _
> I used to stalk bears, not the other way round.
> 
> ...


Don't ruin the story!


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Don't ruin the story!


I was on a boat once in Spitsbergen that rescued a French climber who had been stalked by a Polar Bear for three days. We found him sat on a big rock clutching his rifle with a circle of paw prints round and round and round his rock.

I camped there on my own, unarmed.

A few years later some posh private school boys got eaten camping there.

/better story.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2015)

chilango said:


> I did not. Stop repeating this _slur.
> _
> I used to stalk bears, not the other way round.
> 
> ...


The more i hear about that martin smith the less i like him.


----------



## The Boy (Dec 10, 2015)

chilango said:


> I was on a boat once in Spitsbergen that rescued a French climber who had been stalked by a Polar Bear for three days. We found him sat on a big rock clutching his rifle with a circle of paw prints round and round and round his rock.
> 
> I camped there on my own, unarmed.
> 
> ...



Happy ending, then.


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> The more i hear about that martin smith the less i like him.



Eww!

I work in education. I'd get barred if I hung with "his type" if you get my drift....


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> THE SECRET STATE USES CHUGGERS (CHARITY MUGGERS) CHARITY FUNDRAISERS) to stake out town centres that dont have integrated CCTV systems



Is that supposed to be a revelation?
Old point is old.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

yank chugger outside of oxford street pret the other week, give him the old "this can leed to other things you know, nod wink" - CIA? "hell yeah i wouldnt mind being in the CIA" thankfully he was shelter rather than amnesty or something , then the comrades tugged me away because we had stolen all the food we needed. but yeah people know this? good , glad - fucking greenpeace (personal exp.)


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

Did you know that when chuggers shake hands with you, it's not just a sales trick to make you feel close to them and stop, they're actually subtly planting little spy nanobots in your skin that monitor everything you do and report directly to MI5?


----------



## Diamond (Dec 10, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> yank chugger outside of oxford street pret the other week, give him the old "this can leed to other things you know, nod wink" - CIA? "hell yeah i wouldnt mind being in the CIA" thankfully he was shelter rather than amnesty or something , then the comrades tugged me away because we had stolen all the food we needed. but yeah people know this? good , glad - fucking greenpeace (personal exp.)


 
Interesting stuff


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 10, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Did you know that when chuggers shake hands with you, it's not just a sales trick to make you feel close to them and stop, they're actually subtly planting little spy nanobots in your skin that monitor everything you do and report directly to MI5?



Nah. That's bollocks, they're just slipping an RFID chip up yer sleeve. The nano-bot bugs don't work unless your skin has a neutral Ph, they just curl up and die.


----------



## LDC (Dec 10, 2015)

Fucking vegan nanobots waving their stupid little MI5 endorsed jazz hands though.

And CHUGGERS... rearrange the letters a bit and you get GGCHUERS. Take away the first G (unless you go for the well known theory that it actually stands for Goldsmiths in which case leave it in) and say G.C.H.UERS fast and what do you get? Fucking GCH-quers. Say no more.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Dec 10, 2015)

Anyhoo... bringing the conversation back to something vaguely 'normal' (yeah, right!), can someone explain the logic behind feminists siding with salafists against critics of salafists who decided to intimidate a feminist who had the cheek to not be told what to do and how to live by other salafists? Other than the explanation "huh huh poshoes at uni" (which, to be fair, is almost entirely satisfactory as explanations go), what on earth can explain this bizarre story? What the fuck are people thinking?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2015)

The thread surely has done just that and explaineded why posh lgbt reps feel guilt?

An internal anger that rennies just can't deal with.


----------



## kingfisher (Dec 10, 2015)

spies at uni


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


>




I was wondering if there was a way to shoehorn the mighty Ultras into this thread


----------



## gosub (Dec 10, 2015)

From the facebook feed, justification stems from:they are a downtrodden minority, we are a downtrodden minority,..there is strength trough unity.  They are undergradutes, was bound to be more poncy than frogs and scorpians working together for a better world!


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Dec 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> The thread surely has done just that and explaineded why posh lgbt reps feel guilt?
> 
> An internal anger that rennies just can't deal with.



Fair enough. I probably should have paid more attention to the thread instead of popping in now and again to gawk. Having said that, I can never keep up with these mega-threads. Not sure what a rennie is though.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Fair enough. I probably should have paid more attention to the thread instead of popping in now and again to gawk. Having said that, I can never keep up with these mega-threads. Not sure what a rennie is though.


It's a thing for heartburn = the real reasons for heartburn are not on the back of the box

etc


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Dec 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> It's a thing for hearthburn = the real reasons for heartburn are not on the back of the box
> 
> etc



Haha. For a second I thought it was a studenty term related to identity politics or something.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2015)

all butch ever uses is student politics jargon. it's a wonder anyone understands him at all.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 10, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Anyhoo... bringing the conversation back to something vaguely 'normal' (yeah, right!), can someone explain the logic behind feminists siding with salafists against critics of salafists who decided to intimidate a feminist who had the cheek to not be told what to do and how to live by other salafists? Other than the explanation "huh huh poshoes at uni" (which, to be fair, is almost entirely satisfactory as explanations go), what on earth can explain this bizarre story? What the fuck are people thinking?



I put it down to (in this order) 1) the racism of lower expectations 2) wilful and genuine ignorance of those who they are dealing with 3) political opportunism


----------



## DrRingDing (Dec 11, 2015)

Who actually gives a fuck what windbag nobodies at Goldsmiths says?

106 pages is fucking embarrassing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 11, 2015)

killer b said:


> all butch ever uses is student politics jargon. it's a wonder anyone understands him at all.



Most students don't.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 11, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> Who actually gives a fuck what windbag nobodies at Goldsmiths says?
> 
> 106 pages is fucking embarrassing.



I'll try to explain this to you simply. 
The issue isn't the windbag nobodies, it's what the subject(s) they're wind-bagging about represent for *us* (the common herd) with regard to broader politics.
There were "windbag nobodies" at universities 30-odd years ago blarneying around identity politics, and that led us to a series of fractures that have since ensured a divided, self-interested and self-obsessed broad left. These nobodies have the potential to spread their version of identity politics far enough that those fractures become unrepairable.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> Who actually gives a fuck what windbag nobodies at Goldsmiths says?
> 
> 106 pages is fucking embarrassing.


You've contributed 17 of those posts.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 11, 2015)

gosub said:


> From the facebook feed, justification stems from:they are a downtrodden minority, we are a downtrodden minority,..there is strength trough unity.  They are undergradutes, was bound to be more poncy than frogs and scorpians working together for a better world!



Thing is some people deserve to be downtrodden those who deny rights to other and want to oppress people need to be stopped.


----------



## gosub (Dec 11, 2015)

likesfish said:


> Thing is some people deserve to be downtrodden those who deny rights to other and want to oppress people need to be stopped.


no, more some people get jobs they shouldn't.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Dec 11, 2015)

kingfisher said:


> as is aka psuedonym as is rutita1



Good grief!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Dec 11, 2015)

> *no fan of CKAD btw , burnt his hat* - but he admits to being MI7!



Ah now I know who you are.


----------



## DrRingDing (Dec 11, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'll try to explain this to you simply.
> The issue isn't the windbag nobodies, it's what the subject(s) they're wind-bagging about represent for *us* (the common herd) with regard to broader politics.
> There were "windbag nobodies" at universities 30-odd years ago blarneying around identity politics, and that led us to a series of fractures that have since ensured a divided, self-interested and self-obsessed broad left. These nobodies have the potential to spread their version of identity politics far enough that those fractures become unrepairable.



Given.

But by highlighting them continuously it increases their relevance.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 15, 2015)

cesare said:


> That vid is nearly two hours long
> 
> Has anyone watched it, prepared to summarise?


20 minute low lights here


apols if already posted


----------



## LDC (Dec 15, 2015)

That's some really low quality juvenile disruption. At one point I thought it might end up with everyone just shouting 'safe space' at each other.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> That's some really low quality juvenile disruption. At one point I thought it might end up with everyone just shouting 'safe space' at each other.


ah but i am told - though i cannot speak for the reliability - that there is a foul and obnoxious oath in arabick which sounds much like 'safe space'.


----------



## The Flying Pig (Dec 16, 2015)

ska invita said:


> 20 minute low lights here
> 
> 
> apols if already posted



Hahahahahahaha! Is this what uni students get up to these days! not one of em can punch their way out of a paper bag. A room full of windbags who appear to deserve each other.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 16, 2015)

The Flying Pig said:


> Hahahahahahaha! Is this what uni students get up to these days! not one of em can punch their way out of a paper bag. A room full of windbags who appear to deserve each other.



Yeah I was expecting Maryam to roundhouse kick the front row but she never did, she must be slacking on her MMA skills


----------

