Gender? Sex? Help me out please.

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

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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'.

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.

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.

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)

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.

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.

Well I hope the transphobic (who of course aren't on here) are proud of themselves they have managed to get a live event, which was composed mostly of women and featured one transwoman, cancelled. It will be moved on-line. To be honest the artist in discussion sounds a bit of a prat but it would have been nice if people could have judged for themselves www.poetinthecity.co.uk/news/statement-herstory
Ironic isn't it really people who insist they are supporting women managed to shut down a programme, which was created, organised and performed by women, through threats and intimidation, And some women support that.

Doodledog has indeed nailed it!

Doodledog, @ 7:30 nailed it!
??
Though it would be good if it turns out differently.

It would be really useful if you could explain to us
Don’t hold your breath, FN. We’ve been here before. After a massive own goal, a request for clarification or even a recognition that we may just have had a point - that we haven’t been shouting into a void for so long - is met with complete radio silence.

The more evidence we provide that the trans movement is a cover for blatant misogyny, the more we will be accused of DEMANDING answers, of arrogance or of duplicitous behaviour - if we aren’t simply ignored altogether, as we are for asking ‘trick questions’, such as ‘what is a woman?’

If we then refer to this in the next round of threads (and these issues recur with tedious regularity, so the next round will happen before we’ve had time to draw breath) we’ll be reported for starting threads about threads, or of ‘picking on’ individuals - being regressive and ‘unkind’.

We may as well just talk amongst ourselves for a while, put the kettle on and wait for the next story to break.

GagaJo are you suggesting that respected poet, Alexis Beaufoy-Salguero is a nut job and a cis man ?

Why do you say that AB-S identifies with the sex & gender that were assigned at birth, since we have AB-S's word for it on being a woman?

It would be really useful if you could explain to us.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202203/medium-813930-large-235549-screenshot-15211.png https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202203/medium-977771-e7716cfa-0259-4186-bb14-153fcc06a480.jpeg

Fionne Orlander can easily pass in the Ladies but does, as far as I know, use the Gents.

If we are reorganising society, tho, we need to do it so that everyone is 'comfortable' not just tell women to shut up and lump it.

That's very well put, and neatly answers the 'who is going to police it?' question that we keep getting asked (it really is the same hymn sheet, isn't it?).

I wonder if we are reaching the point where those who see themselves as 'kind', or 'tolerant', or part of the zeitgeist are realising that we cynics have a point - that it's all very well wanting the harmless and troubled souls to be left in peace, but that doing so will open doors to more dangerous 'nut jobs'? That we aren't 'trans exclusionary', we aren't transphobic, we aren't even behind the times - we are just wise to the reality of the situation, and that we want to keep ourselves and other women safe from the ill-intentioned amongst the so-called 'cis men' who have pounced on the opportunities the 'allies' have afforded them, and used them to further their misogynist agendas.

I saw this on MN and I've "borrowed" it because it so perfectly says what I want to say but I'm not articulate enough to explain it:

In practice, no-one is going to 'police' who visits which toilet, but what the single-sex rule does is make it possible to object and complain if a man does enter the female toilets. Without such a rule women would have no right to object. We would have to put up with it with no legal or regulatory recourse.

The rule also acts as a deterrent. At present there is nothing to physically stop a man going into the women's toilets to assault someone, but it doesn't usually happen because of the taboo against men being seen to go into the 'ladies room'. At present such a predator generally chooses some other location. Without the taboo or rule in place, more predatory men would feel more comfortable being seen going into the female areas.

On the whole I think most women don't object (and historically haven't objected) to what you might call 'genuine' transwomen (the type with dysphoria who make every effort to 'pass') using the female areas. The social convention is that we all turn a blind eye and mind our own business if nobody is causing any trouble.

But if an aggressive male fetishist in a dress comes in demanding to share make-up or engage in his idea of 'girly talk', women at present have the right to complain (to whoever is in charge of the facilities) about his presence and get him removed. Or at least we did have that right until a few years ago... I'm not sure how successful such a complaint would actually be now.

Chewbacca, Doodledog, you said it!

As you say Doodledog; this is now the real world. It's the world created by those who have been falling over themselves to be seen as kind, accommodating and willing to allow them to be their authentic selves whilst failing to see that by removing all previously held societal conventions and safeguards, they've enabled nut jobs to make far more difficulties for the scared, vulnerable and normal people who happen to be natal women and trans women. The baby went out with the bath water folks.