Preferred pronoun badges at the Halifax bank.

OK let's have this conversation.

Dangers imposed by men, my words, meant in plural form and quite commonly used but let's go a bit deeper.

Almost every woman has had a bad experience with a man. Almost every woman has experienced sexism. Almost every woman had been touched when they didn't want to be or experienced unwanted advances. Far too many have experienced abuse. Some of us on many occasions.

The result is we don't know if we are safe anymore. We don't know if we are safe walking or exercising alone. We don't know if we are safe meeting for a date We don't know if we are safe inviting someone home for the first time. We don't know if we are safe if a tradesman enters the house.

Isn't that far more worth several comments than complaining because you aren't sure a woman means "men" plural because you haven't taken the time to look around yourself at the wives, mothers and grandmothers here who obviously enjoy family life and if that family isn't a mother and father, it generally does involve sons and grandsons?

Surely the easiest solution to "not all men" isn't policing language because of your own perception of what other people mean but actually policing the "some men" responsible for making far too many women feel unsafe and the effect that had on you.

Yes Violetsky, a policing of the actions of some men would be very welcome. Women have never felt fully safe I think, and the same goes for many other groups - teenage boys involved in gangs, knife crime, just at school where teasing is rife for one.
But language is a powerful tool in framing how people think about each other.

The Halifax is not alone in making the importance of preferred pronouns explicit. I have just received an email from someone at my local council with her preferred pronouns after her name. So helpful to have things crystal clear.

I don't know what you mean VioletSky. How can we choose to police the "some men" if we don't know who they are?
But I think something that might give us a clue is if they are ignoring how we feel about them being in places where we are undressed or otherwise vulnerable.
I am not really bothered about the bank pronouns but I am bothered about the way that banks behave in general and them forking out for a few name tags doesn't change my mind.

Ilovecheese I am not going to go to such great lengths to show that those of us who use "men" in plural form categorically do not mean " all men" and then be OK with the "all transwomen" rhetoric.

I have clearly said from the beginning of these threads:

I understand why women don't feel safe and need safe spaces.

I understand that a very few " transwomen" do not have genuine gender dysphoria and instead either fetishise women or use legislation to attack and endanger women.

I believe that no victim should need to use their attackers chosen pronouns, although they may find they need to use " them or they" just because our law system states that a person is innocent until proven guilty and that matters. However these needs to be understanding and leniency in the courtroom when dealing with trauma victims.

However, men are in a position to police each other...they can tell each other that behaviour is not OK, they are not a marginalised group as the male sex.

I don't ask trans people to do the same and police extreme views when hate crime is so high and outing themselves as trans, may put them in danger.

There is no understanding and leniency in the courtroom when dealing with trauma victims which is why women who are victims have had to refer to their male assailant as 'she' because that is now how they are identifying.

It has absolutely nothing to do with being innocent until proven guilty either. A woman referring to her male assailant as them or they isn't going to persuade a jury to lean toward a guilty verdict anymore than it would encourage them to lean toward a verdict of innocent.

During the many threads here on GN about this subject, I have yet to see anyone post "all trans women".

Not sure why you are repeating what I said in different words then using it as an argument against me "Smileless"

Also cartoons.

It's what one does to show that they're disagreeing with a point of view, and why.

VioletSky

Not sure why you are repeating what I said in different words then using it as an argument against me "Smileless"

Also cartoons.

Try again

Quite simply, you hold views that others don't.
I get the same response about certain unpopular views I hold.

I don't take it personally, though, neither does it change my views.

That's really odd when it is one of the things I do agree is an issue.... is what I was trying to say....

But here we are regardless

Exactly MissA it isn't personal, it's a debate.

OK Smileless

Unfortunately, victims of some violent men have been compelled to refer to their attacker as 'she' and I agree with you VS that that shouldn't happen.

I was with you up until your last paragraph. What were you getting at here?
I don't ask trans people to do the same and police extreme views when hate crime is so high and outing themselves as trans, may put them in danger.

And Also cartoons ?

The cartoons were illustrating situations that do happen. There is no implication that "all transwomen" do all those things, if that's what you meant.

That was my point FarNorth, there is no leniency or understanding in a court of law when the female victim of a crime perpetrated by a man is required to her refer to her assailant as 'she'.

I am OK with disagreeing on that point FarNorth I can see the arguments either way but that's where I land at the moment.

The cartoons were vile and whatever message you saw.... it is clear to me that others are more black and white and that is why I think they are vile.... and actually dangerous and also deeply upsetting.

I can only be honest

There is something I could post that highlights what I mean. But it is also vile and I don't want it in the wrong hands by sharing.

It depicts a feminist and a liberal with hairy legs, dirty clothes, an angry shouting mouth, and well a lot more but basically a stereotype of a feminist shared by (some) men who deem us unattractive and worthless.

The woman is asking for basic feminist principles.

Wouldnt offend me. Lots of men dont like feminists. I am of the view that if lots of men are cheering on your feminism it's probably not feminism

So, in that cartoon, the woman is made to look repulsive while she is saying something reasonable?
In the cartoons I posted, the transwomen do not look repulsive and are doing & saying things which are not reasonable and which genuinely are part of the "trans rights" currently being demanded, and given.

FarNorth, I think what she is asking for is reasonable.... the cartoon. Does. NOT

That is the point

Smileless2012

That was my point FarNorth, there is no leniency or understanding in a court of law when the female victim of a crime perpetrated by a man is required to her refer to her assailant as 'she'.

Smileless2012 wrote ... the female victim of a crime perpetrated by a man is required to her refer to her assailant as 'she'

How does that work?

Does somebody (if so who?) say to her something like "You must refer to the accused as 'she'"?

Could the victim refer to the person as "the accused" and avoid using the word she?

If one can avoid saying 'she' at the Halifax then can one avoid saying 'she' in a courtroom?

Could the victim say "I am on oath to tell nothing but the truth and my evidence is that the accused is a man".

VioletSky

FarNorth, I think what she is asking for is reasonable.... the cartoon. Does. NOT

That is the point

Oh and the tag line was that the reasonable things we asked for would lead to us all eventually crushing their balls and murdering male babies... for some reason. Whilst some women have done both those things, it's still ridiculous to assume any of the rest of us would want that right?

It is.
There was nothing like that in the 'trans' cartoons.

I don't know how that works StarDreamer but it does. The victim is instructed to refer to her assailant by that person's preferred pronoun.

Imagine the scenario. The victim is giving evidence and re living a traumatic experience and cannot refer to her assailant as he. She can't say 'they grabbed me from behind' because that would suggest there was more than one. She can't say 'he' because the accused is identifying as a woman.

There is no comparison between a court room and a bank is there.

Likewise, there is no comparison between the cartoons we saw and one that depicts a feminist and a liberal with hairy legs, an angry mouth. As you say FarNorth the cartoon representations of the transwomen were not repulsive.

OK FarNorth

You do you.....

StarDreamer here is an account by Maria MacLachlan who, in 2018, had to give evidence about an attack on her by a transwoman (man) and was told by the Judge to refer to the attacker as 'she'.

Although the attacker was found guilty, compensation was not awarded to Ms MacLachlan because she did not always remember to call the man 'she' during her evidence.

www.peaktrans.org/district-judge-kenneth-grant/

Here is an article on the December 2021 revision of the Equal Treatment Bench Book which begins to address some of the difficulties which trans ideology creates in a court setting.

www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2022/01/03/the-new-interim-version-of-the-equal-treatment-bench-book/