Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Feminism - where are the threads?

JudithB said:
These are assumptions and that is all. I came here to find feminists and those interested in feminism.

I'm sorry the tran debate has ruined friendships and caused a schism on these boards and I would rather stay out of it.
Click to expand...

Yes, they are only my suspicions based on some of what you wrote. But I can't prove it, and, it's quite possible I'm wrong. But, like you, it's not something I'm keen to argue about. Especially as I agree with some of what you say, even if I think the way you went about it was a bit sus (and that some of what you say goes too far, in my opinion).
 
JudithB said:
These are assumptions and that is all. I came here to find feminists and those interested in feminism.

I'm sorry the tran debate has ruined friendships and caused a schism on these boards and I would rather stay out of it.
Click to expand...
Yeh you would now that you've been shown to be economical with the actualité
 
Pickman's model said:
Yeh if she had any respect for the community she'd have at least said 'sorry, an oversight' when confronted with evidence she lied about Bristol uni toilets. Not to mention all the other greater things she's done
Click to expand...

I did not lie about Bristol Uni toilets. You misunderstood me. The posters went up, they try to deplatform people and that article was shit.
 
JudithB said:
I did not lie about Bristol Uni toilets. You misunderstood me. The posters went up, they try to deplatform people and that article was shit.
Click to expand...
Oh I understood you all too well. You said those posters are in every Bristol uni loo. But they're not. Did you not note the date on the telegraph article? 2014. They were up for one week in 2014. Have you ever used a toilet with a five year auld poster in it?

If you're going to lie about things you link to I don't have any confidence in your telling the truth about things you don't support with sources
 
JudithB said:
It's there as a satirical and fairly accurate account of how things happened. It's a chance for people to see the other side of the debate without the usual calls of... the words we all know are shouted.

And most importantly for people to realise just how long this has been going on. This did not start last year or the year before. Some of us have been trying to talk about this for half a decade now. And that could be why we get rather cross about it.
Click to expand...

Its been going on half a century, when radical feminists in the states sent death threats to trans women and turned up with guns to threaten a trans woman. It continued into the 80s when Sheila Jefreys and her cronies tried to expel trans women (and bisexual people and the wrong kind of lesbians) from the London Lesbian and Gay Centre, it rumbled on through the 90s and the birth of the internet when blogs like twansphobic were doxing trans people and humiliating them online, and when the GRA was introduced Jeffreys and co made much about how it was the end of womanhood and all the fears that are being raised about self ID now were then raised about GRAs. The only reason it didn't fly in a more mainstream way is that you didn't have Murdoch on your side then.

Trans people endured decades of organised abuse and harassment from a certain branch of radical feminism with virtually no pushback, to pretend this row just emerged when you heard of it shows a (probably willfully) ignorant of the history of your own movement.
 
Last edited:
Pickman's model said:
Oh I understood you all too well. You said those posters are in every Bristol uni loo. But they're not. Did you not note the date on the telegraph article? 2014. They were up for one week in 2014. Have you ever used a toilet with a five year auld poster in it?

If you're going to lie about things you link to I don't have any confidence in your telling the truth about things you don't support with sources
Click to expand...

Lied about Bristol Uni having a habit of no platforming people as well, when the Students Union say this:
Bristol SU have stated that they have ‘not refused a platform to any speaker in the last few years’ and follow the University’s Freedom of Speech Code of Practice which claims that the only exception to freedom of speech on campus ‘is where there are serious concerns about public disorder or the direct incitement of violence or hatred.’
Click to expand...
 
There’s something intentionally disempowering about accusing someone of lying when they actually just disagree with you. It seems sly.

When we’re arguing, people will have different takes than you, events will be viewed with opposing slants, statistics will be selectively quotes, some aspects will be magnified or minimised depending on your opponents bias. This is human nature and rarely what I would define as a lie.

Accusing someone of lying is inflammatory, and it personalises the debate. At worst, it’s a nasty psychological trick to undermine someone’s credibility and foundation.

I’m really fucking circumspect with the word liar.
 
Edie said:
There’s something intentionally disempowering about accusing someone of lying when they actually just disagree with you. It seems sly.

When we’re arguing, people will have different takes than you, events will be viewed with opposing slants, statistics will be selectively quotes, some aspects will be magnified or minimised depending on your opponents bias. This is human nature and rarely what I would define as a lie.

Accusing someone of lying is inflammatory, and it personalises the debate. At worst, it’s a nasty psychological trick to undermine someone’s credibility and foundation.

I’m really fucking circumspect with the word liar.
Click to expand...

The thing is it is the endless lies which are causing the real social damage to trans people (see the other thread on rising hate crimes for details). I don't recall anyone (here) defending the Daily Mail when they were lying about benefit claimants, sorry, viewing things with opposing slants and selectively using quotes and statistics. This stuff causes real harm, and when it can be shown a lot of it is untrue then those who insist in perpetuating these myths despite knowing they are without foundation, should be named for what they are imo, which is a liar.

If someone was making dodgy claims to undermine lone parents, I suspect you would have little sympathy. That's how it feels Edie, I was a claimant when we endured that torrent of shit from the right wing press and this feels exactly the same. And the end result - which is what some people want - will be to make trans people withdraw from social activity, like posting on urban in this case.
 
Edie said:
There’s something intentionally disempowering about accusing someone of lying when they actually just disagree with you. It seems sly.

When we’re arguing, people will have different takes than you, events will be viewed with opposing slants, statistics will be selectively quotes, some aspects will be magnified or minimised depending on your opponents bias. This is human nature and rarely what I would define as a lie.

Accusing someone of lying is inflammatory, and it personalises the debate. At worst, it’s a nasty psychological trick to undermine someone’s credibility and foundation.

I’m really fucking circumspect with the word liar.
Click to expand...
Yeh. I don't call someone a liar just because they disagree with me, but because they disagree with established fact.
 
People who only post on one subject, create multiple threads on that one subject, and then attempt to manage/curate them, as well as limit who can post on them to ensure they stay pointed in their direction - particularly when that subject is contentious - are fanatics.

what are Judith's views on Brexit and the EU, or Syria, or wild camping, or the transport network, or Osprey Migration, or the Cricket World Cup?
 
kebabking said:
People who only post on one subject, create multiple threads on that one subject, and then attempt to manage/curate them, as well as limit who can post on them to ensure they stay pointed in their direction - particularly when that subject is contentious - are fanatics.

what are Judith's views on Brexit and the EU, or Syria, or wild camping, or the transport network, or Osprey Migration, or the Cricket World Cup?
Click to expand...
She does rate carry on screaming so she's not all bad
 
kebabking said:
People who only post on one subject, create multiple threads on that one subject, and then attempt to manage/curate them, as well as limit who can post on them to ensure they stay pointed in their direction - particularly when that subject is contentious - are fanatics.

what are Judith's views on Brexit and the EU, or Syria, or wild camping, or the transport network, or Osprey Migration, or the Cricket World Cup?
Click to expand...
I for one want to hear what her feelings are about Osprey Migration, good call. And any check ins on the Shepard’s delight tracking service, which truly is a one of a kind feature and one of my favourite threads.
 
Edie said:
There’s something intentionally disempowering about accusing someone of lying when they actually just disagree with you. It seems sly.

When we’re arguing, people will have different takes than you, events will be viewed with opposing slants, statistics will be selectively quotes, some aspects will be magnified or minimised depending on your opponents bias. This is human nature and rarely what I would define as a lie.

Accusing someone of lying is inflammatory, and it personalises the debate. At worst, it’s a nasty psychological trick to undermine someone’s credibility and foundation.

I’m really fucking circumspect with the word liar.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, on the whole, however, if people present information as fact, when it’s not supported by evidence, it’s not unreasonable to suggest they are being dishonest.

I happen to think JudithB isn’t who they make out they are - I think they’re mendacious (at best). This is opinion, not fact.

It’s important to distinguish the two.
 
I said Bristol Uni have up some posters that they had had up and had then taken down (apparently very quickly. Hoorah young women objected I hope). The point was what was on the posters and how there is a strong push inside that Uni for an ideology I do not believe in. I referenced the student no platforming people. They were successful with one and did not manage the other. I linked to articles in this or another thread. This was all to do with my objection to mixed sex toilets and then my stating correctly that a paper that had been linked to say there is nothing wrong with mixed sex toilets was probably to be taken with a pinch of salt. I was right. The paper was tosh.

And the issue I raised was never addressed and as I have said several times now. This is probably not the forum to discuss it. It was never my intention to discuss these issues. I do not want to contribute to what I have read are schisms and most importantly broken friendships.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

danny la rouge
What are the underlying causes of hate crime?
2
Replies
53
Views
1K
pug
pug
Cloo
Why are more young men than older seeing feminism as a bad thing?
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
287
Views
15K
mango5
mango5
frogwoman
What are the international implications if Israel gets kicked out of the UN?
2
Replies
40
Views
1K
The39thStep
The39thStep
Cloo
Where to start with bell hooks?
Replies
6
Views
398
GarveyLives
G
zedr
French Revolutionary Calendar - what are you?
2
Replies
33
Views
915
Fozzie Bear
Fozzie Bear
Back
Top Bottom