Gender? Sex? Help me out please.

Wow!

That really takes the gaslighting biscuit, doesn't it?

It is the fault of transphobics for standing up to the nonsense of having an aggressive bearded 'transwoman', (who even GagaJo thought was a 'cis man' and a 'nut job', and ridiculed us for 'falling for' the fact that he is genuinely passing himself off as female) as the headline poet in a 'Herstory' celebration of women through poetry? The fault of transphobes?

Do you have nothing to say about the situation that allows this can happen, beyond 'he's a bit of a prat'? No comment on GagaJo's post, as she has vanished from the thread? Here it is again, to save you scrolling back:

Sure, we support nut jobs who are actually cis men. If you believe that, you'll believe anything. But then... that's what this is all about. Catastropising and fantasy. Not inhabiting the real world with trans people who are scared, vulnerable and normal people.

Does A B-S look 'scared, vulnerable and normal' to you?

Oh, and what makes you think that we haven't 'judged for ourselves? Chewbacca provided the link in her post. It was clearly GagaJo who didn't bother to check it out, not us.

All I can say Doodledog is I am very surprised at your response. You apparently approve of the transphobic threats of violence and physical harm made on social media that have caused the cancellation of a live event that featured one person whose views you disapprove of. The women in this are of course just collateral damage. It just shows how wrong you can be about someone. I genuinely believed you had women's best interests at heart even if your views were a bit prejudiced.
Please explain how it is gaslighting to state the facts? Are any of these questionable
1 Her Story is a woman's organisation, run by and featuring women.
2. At this one event one transwoman was invited to perform.
3. A social media storm of transphobic hatred and threats began
4. The event has been cancelled because the safety of people was threatened.
5. Women have been silenced.
I don't know if the person in question would have been absolutely brilliant or terrible. I do object strongly to not being able to judge for myself.

By the way if you are questioning the use of the word transwoman I use it because that is the way the person was invited to attend. I refuse to join the social media hate and blame fest that is going on. The posts are awful but as I said it would have been nice to see how women at the festival would have treated this person (I am not using him or her because I have no idea)

Still no comment on GagaJo labelling the transwoman as a 'cis male nutjob' trisher? You're quick enough to criticise any GC comments from posters on here.

The person is not only a nut job trisher but had made offensive, aggressive threats to women.
Perhaps the event could have disinvited him because of his aggression, allowing the women poets to continue?

By the way, I have attended women's events where threats had been made to the organisers and to the venues.
The solution was not to give up and hide, but to ensure there was good security so that the events went ahead.

trisher

By the way if you are questioning the use of the word transwoman I use it because that is the way the person was invited to attend. I refuse to join the social media hate and blame fest that is going on. The posts are awful but as I said it would have been nice to see how women at the festival would have treated this person (I am not using him or her because I have no idea)

I thought you stood with any woman who identified as a woman? This person identifies as a woman, was invited as a transwoman and yet you won't gender them "her" because you do not know. The organisers obviously celebrate the individual as a 'woman' do you disagree with them?
I don't believe any poster here would have joined in with a SM 'hate fest'.

trisher

All I can say Doodledog is I am very surprised at your response. You apparently approve of the transphobic threats of violence and physical harm made on social media that have caused the cancellation of a live event that featured one person whose views you disapprove of. The women in this are of course just collateral damage. It just shows how wrong you can be about someone. I genuinely believed you had women's best interests at heart even if your views were a bit prejudiced.
Please explain how it is gaslighting to state the facts? Are any of these questionable
1 Her Story is a woman's organisation, run by and featuring women.
2. At this one event one transwoman was invited to perform.
3. A social media storm of transphobic hatred and threats began
4. The event has been cancelled because the safety of people was threatened.
5. Women have been silenced.
I don't know if the person in question would have been absolutely brilliant or terrible. I do object strongly to not being able to judge for myself.

Oh, come on!

I know exactly what Herstory is, FWIW.

Also, Do Not tell me that I approve of threats of violence - I most certainly do not, and your ridiculous allegations are the last refuge of someone who has been shown to be blinkered in her support of the indefensible.

The 'collateral damage' analogy is disrespectful to victims of war - the women to whom you refer are still performing, but doing so online, so will reach a larger audience than in person. Many Arts events are realising that it is more inclusive (which is much broader than 'trans-inclusive') to offer participation online. Whereas I am aware that that was not the driver in this case, nobody has been silenced, and you can judge for yourself if you watch online, so your outrage is not only feigned but foolish.

Do not gaslight me by suggesting that my opinion is equivalent to not having women's interests at heart. For one thing, you don't appear to understand what gaslighting means, and for another, I didn't give my opinion on the cancellation of the event!

I said nothing about it, beyond the fact that A B-S is very clearly not 'scared, vulnerable and 'normal', and that GagaJo believed him to be a 'cis man' and a 'nut job', and your superior 'judge for yourself' comment was ill-judged, as it was clear that it was not the 'GC' people who hadn't bothered to check it out, but GagaJo herself.

I was amused before, then your post made me angry, but now I feel vindicated that you have shown yourself for what you are. You have reacted to a situation in which the TRA 'lobby' on here was hoist by its own petard by lashing out with baseless insults and claims that are so obviously untrue that it casts doubt on your right to be taken seriously at all.

FarNorth

The person is not only a nut job trisher but had made offensive, aggressive threats to women.
Perhaps the event could have disinvited him because of his aggression, allowing the women poets to continue?

By the way, I have attended women's events where threats had been made to the organisers and to the venues.
The solution was not to give up and hide, but to ensure there was good security so that the events went ahead.

Could you explain who would pay for the security FarNorth. Especially at such short notice? The organisation isn't huge and doesn't have a huge budget. As the event was in a city library the council may well have told them they couldn't go ahead because of the risks.
I don't regard the person as anything but a sort of sideshow in what has happened. The amazing thing for me is that people who have posted about how posts to JK Rowling are horrific and disgusting, seem quite happy to accept any amount of social abuse when it is aimed elsewhere. And are happy to see women miss out because of it.

Well put Doodledog.
This paragraph is particularly accurate in its assessment of her comments.
Do Not tell me that I approve of threats of violence - I most certainly do not, and your ridiculous allegations are the last refuge of someone who has been shown to be blinkered in her support of the indefensible.

Doodledog

trisher

All I can say Doodledog is I am very surprised at your response. You apparently approve of the transphobic threats of violence and physical harm made on social media that have caused the cancellation of a live event that featured one person whose views you disapprove of. The women in this are of course just collateral damage. It just shows how wrong you can be about someone. I genuinely believed you had women's best interests at heart even if your views were a bit prejudiced.
Please explain how it is gaslighting to state the facts? Are any of these questionable
1 Her Story is a woman's organisation, run by and featuring women.
2. At this one event one transwoman was invited to perform.
3. A social media storm of transphobic hatred and threats began
4. The event has been cancelled because the safety of people was threatened.
5. Women have been silenced.
I don't know if the person in question would have been absolutely brilliant or terrible. I do object strongly to not being able to judge for myself.

Oh, come on!

I know exactly what Herstory is, FWIW.

Also, Do Not tell me that I approve of threats of violence - I most certainly do not, and your ridiculous allegations are the last refuge of someone who has been shown to be blinkered in her support of the indefensible.

The 'collateral damage' analogy is disrespectful to victims of war - the women to whom you refer are still performing, but doing so online, so will reach a larger audience than in person. Many Arts events are realising that it is more inclusive (which is much broader than 'trans-inclusive') to offer participation online. Whereas I am aware that that was not the driver in this case, nobody has been silenced, and you can judge for yourself if you watch online, so your outrage is not only feigned but foolish.

Do not gaslight me by suggesting that my opinion is equivalent to not having women's interests at heart. For one thing, you don't appear to understand what gaslighting means, and for another, I didn't give my opinion on the cancellation of the event!

I said nothing about it, beyond the fact that A B-S is very clearly not 'scared, vulnerable and 'normal', and that GagaJo believed him to be a 'cis man' and a 'nut job', and your superior 'judge for yourself' comment was ill-judged, as it was clear that it was not the 'GC' people who hadn't bothered to check it out, but GagaJo herself.

I was amused before, then your post made me angry, but now I feel vindicated that you have shown yourself for what you are. You have reacted to a situation in which the TRA 'lobby' on here was hoist by its own petard by lashing out with baseless insults and claims that are so obviously untrue that it casts doubt on your right to be taken seriously at all.

Most of us have seen far too much on-line stuff during lockdown Doodledog and know that a live performance is something else. Something we have missed. Pretending on-line is anything like the same experience is laughable. Are all women's events to be on-line now? Or are they to have their performers vetted by social media before they can go ahead?

How was I hoist by my own petard? Because someone who claims to be a transwomen reacted violently to abusive comments on social media? Really! I don't know anything about them. They may be brilliant, they may be crap. Thanks to the abuse I won't know. I don't care who posts the abuse, I don't care who it is aimed at. It is all wrong. And anyone who doesn't condemn it who thinks it is OK for women to be driven off stage and forced to perform on line is not really interested in women at all, but pursuing some agenda of their own.

trisher Strangely I don't think I've ever seen you come on here to post that the violent demonstrations and SM threats to meetings by female organisations were wrong and to be condemned. The intimidation of Kathleen Stock by organised TRAs at her university? The cancelling of talks at universities because the speaker was GC? I must have missed your solidarity with those targeted women.

Oh I know we mustn't have threads about a thread, but an enquiry is surely acceptable. Do you intend to return to a thread you started encouraging a boycott, or was the evidence provided against too accurate for you to refute?

Thanks Rosie51.
You saved me having to ask those unanswerable questions and put it so much better than I would have done.

Most of us have seen far too much on-line stuff during lockdown Doodledog and know that a live performance is something else. Something we have missed.
It is very clear that you see your experience and opinion as the only worth bothering about, but even so - you can't speak for 'most of us' here. Many people have enjoyed being able to 'attend' Arts events virtually that they have been able to experience in person - for reasons of disability, geography, caring responsibilities and so on. You may not be of their number, but you don't speak for everyone.

Pretending on-line is anything like the same experience is laughable.
Laugh if you like, but I am not pretending anything. Some events translate very well to the online environment. Have you attended any poetry ones? It can be far less distracting to be able to hear the poets without background noises and poor acoustics, and it is easier for the organisers to get a range of performers to read - poetry readings are not well-paid, and there is a tiny budget for most events, so it can be difficult to even cover expenses.

Are all women's events to be on-line now?
No, I doubt it. Why do you say that?

Or are they to have their performers vetted by social media before they can go ahead?
Well, I would venture to suggest that if JKR, Kathleen Stock or many other speakers wanted to perform there would have to be vetting. I seem to remember you defending 'cancellation' in universities because in your opinion students are not adult enough to be exposed to opinions other than their (and your) own. Have you changed your mind about this, or does vetting only have to happen if you disapprove of the speakers?

How was I hoist by my own petard?
The TRA 'lobby' on here was HBIOP when GagaJo reacted with a sneer and an insult to those of us who posted about the Herstory debacle. She believed that he was, indeed a 'cis man' and a 'nut job', and claimed that we were transphobic for not recognising this, and 'catastrophising'. This made the point very clearly that it is not always possible to tell transwomen and 'cis men' apart, which is the basis of the concerns of the 'gender critical' lobby.

Because someone who claims to be a transwomen reacted violently to abusive comments on social media? Really!
No. See above.

I don't know anything about them.
Clearly, but you are still happy to be insulting to me in 'their' defense.

They may be brilliant, they may be crap. Thanks to the abuse I won't know
No, if you are genuinely interested, which I doubt, you can very easily find our for yourself.

I don't care who posts the abuse, I don't care who it is aimed at. It is all wrong.
So you have changed your mind about JKR? Or are you going to ignore this part of my post?

And anyone who doesn't condemn it who thinks it is OK for women to be driven off stage and forced to perform on line is not really interested in women at all, but pursuing some agenda of their own.
Total false equivalence. And libellous. And frankly idiotic.

Firstly I stopped posting about JKR or any of the GC feminists whose social media has had insults and abuse posted on it because actually no one was interested or bothered about my condemning it all (including that experienced by Diane Abbott and other black women MPS). I can only say I condemn all kinds of abuse, violence and threats so many times and either you believe me or not. If you don't there is nothing I can do about it. So I withdraw from posting on the subject.

When I support universities choosing who speaks at their events that is entirely their choice and if an organisation does not wish to give someone a platform they are entitled to do so. (Really what do you want to do? Have a police unit going round looking at who is and isn't invited and insisting some people must be? It's ludicrous)
If someone is invited and then has to be cancelled because of social media threats I would not agree with that.
And if an event is cancelled because of social media threats I consider it appalling.

As for the comments about poetry events I've been to lots of them. Reading poems is just one part of a poetry event. There are performance poets and audience participation is often part of that. It can't be replicated on-line nor can the absolute pleasure of applause and appreciation after a particularly excellent reading or performance. Both the audience and the poets deserve and have missed that. On-line performances may have a place but that place should not be as a substitute for a live performance because of threats and violence. I'm amazed anyone would try to justify that.
So carry on trying to justify the unjustifiable. I'm quite happy to reject all violence, all hatred, all discrimination and any other speech or action which causes harm to anyone no matter what their gender or sex.

Trisher, you posted these words @ 12:31, *
So carry on trying to justify the unjustifiable.
Sadly, I’m sure you will.

Mollygo

Trisher, you posted these words @ 12:31, *
So carry on trying to justify the unjustifiable.
Sadly, I’m sure you will.

I'm sure if you think having women's events cancelled is OK you will think so. I'm not sure how that equates with feminism though, so perhaps you can explain.

trisher

Mollygo

Trisher, you posted these words @ 12:31, *
So carry on trying to justify the unjustifiable.
Sadly, I’m sure you will.

I'm sure if you think having women's events cancelled is OK you will think so. I'm not sure how that equates with feminism though, so perhaps you can explain.

You know full well that's not what Mollygo thinks. You know what she was saying quoting your own words back to you. Nice try, but no cigar.

Trisher @12:31
*I'm quite happy to reject all violence,
all hatred, all discrimination and any other speech or action which causes harm to anyone no matter what their gender or sex.*
Right, so along with all the ‘intersectional’ jargon you would stand up and say
- you reject discrimination perpetrated against natal females by TW and their supporters in cases of ’cancelling’ women like Kathleen Stock?
-you reject violence by some TW against women.
-you reject the hatred towards natal women displayed by TRA?
That’s really good news.

The thing is that the Herstory event has not been cancelled.

As I said, the driver wasn't inclusivity in this case, but inclusivity will have been achieved by moving it online. Yes, there are things that get lost by moving away from in-person events, and those who can access those (by virtue of being able-bodied, or of living somewhere with good transport, or of being able to afford a car, or of not having dependents, or many of the other things that prevent others from going out) will miss them. Others will cheer, however, so maybe lower your blood pressure by giving them a passing thought instead of raging against the fact that a 'cis man' who is, by your own assessment 'a bit of a prat' has been moved online, not cancelled. He's probably saving a fortune in expenses and will reach a wider audience so will sell more books.

Doodledog

The thing is that the Herstory event has not been cancelled.

As I said, the driver wasn't inclusivity in this case, but inclusivity will have been achieved by moving it online. Yes, there are things that get lost by moving away from in-person events, and those who can access those (by virtue of being able-bodied, or of living somewhere with good transport, or of being able to afford a car, or of not having dependents, or many of the other things that prevent others from going out) will miss them. Others will cheer, however, so maybe lower your blood pressure by giving them a passing thought instead of raging against the fact that a 'cis man' who is, by your own assessment 'a bit of a prat' has been moved online, not cancelled. He's probably saving a fortune in expenses and will reach a wider audience so will sell more books.

Actually as nodate has been set for the on-line performance and the live one should have been yesterday it has not simply been moved on-line. That wold have meant it happened yesterday. It didn't. Carry on Doodledog I love seeing you trying to justfy this on the grounds of inclusivity.
Let's propose an alternative. If JKR had been invited to take part in an event and that was moved on-line because she had been threatened and her safety couldn't be guaranteed would that be better?

Yes trisher, although JKR has already had so many threats to her safety and some of those are ongoing thanks to . . .

Is your version of inclusivity that because women have had to, and are still having to, deal with threats where their safety cannot be guaranteed, but haven’t all been moved online, that’s a reason for men to be treated like that?
Weird point of view, but it happens.
Jo Cox was shot and stabbed. David Amess was stabbed.

Carry on Doodledog I love seeing you trying to justfy this on the grounds of inclusivity.

I'm not. I have already said twice that inclusivity wasn't the driver. It's a side effect of what has happened, but not necessarily a negative one.

I don't need to justify anything. I got involved in this part of the thread when Chewbacca posted about A B-S, and GJ jumped on us for 'catastrophising'. It seemed to me a perfect example of how so-called 'cis men' are using the TWAW and No Debate climate to dominate what are supposedly women's events, and GJ's unjustified anger at our justified annoyance was amusing, as it highlighted how difficult these things can be. Which is what we have been saying since what feels like the dawn of time.

I haven't commented on my opinion about the reason for the event being moved online. You have told me what I think, but that may or may not be true. What I have said is that the end result does not mean that 'thanks to the abuse, you will never know' how good A B-S is as a poet. You can get a ticket to see the event online, as can more people than would have been able to attend in-person. I'm not the one who's catastrophising - all's well that ends well, no?

So all I should be concerned with is if I can get a ticket? That's a pretty self centred philosophy isn't it?
No comments about the other women who should have performed Doodledog Oh I forgot it's going to be so much better hearing them on-line isn't it? If it happens of course.

Thanks Mollygo you've just alligned my views with those of murderers. Which goes to show as I said earlier that it doesn't matter how many times I post that all abuse is wrong, that all violence is wrong and no one should be silenced, some people never listen.

Really any respect I had for you lot as women who perhaps were afraid and just had the best interests of others at their heart has totally disappeared. Anyone who tries to justify or excuse the violence and threats which caused this event to be cancelled (or moved on-line) is as bad as those who made any threats at all on social media regardless of who they were made to.

* Thanks Mollygo you've just alligned my views with those of murderers.*

No trisher! You’ve twisted my words!
Shocking! I’ve read how you accuse people of doing that to you.
I just asked if you really meant what you said, even when it applied to violence against AHF women by men or TW, and gave some examples.
Evidently not.

What now?? Am I really being accused of transphobia for posting about an event that, unknown to me, had been cancelled 5 days before I even knew about it and that a trans allies had dismissed as being attended by a nut job cis man ? Really? I know I've said that I've frequently been gaslit for "mis remembering" and "deliberately misunderstanding" posts, but this has to be the best gaslighting ever! The only solace that I can glean from the mind bending manipulation on here is that, if trisher is correct, and the event has been conducted online due to intimidation and threats, I'm taking that as being a sign that the Jo Public's voice is getting louder and louder and they're being heard. It's somewhat disingenuous to complain bitterly when the voice of a cis man nut job is criticised on line but its hunky dory and fair game when JKRowling suffers far worse. Gas lighting par excellence. Incredible.