You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So we can't even have a debate on what that OP raised then?
Guess they should have linked it to Brexit somehow then it would have been fine.
While it was likely to veer into hatred and bigotry, it hadn't yet, unless there were posts I hadn't seen, so It did seem a bit strange to shut it down at that stage.
Would the issue have been resolved through debate? I doubt it.
It could have turned funny though.
Who says it needs to be resolved?
Everyone airs their opinion, we all go for cake.
Strange assumption there, zippy - is anything on here ever resolved?
I'd be interested in the mods' thoughts on why the thread was removed - exactly what forum rules was it in breach of? Colin?
Maybe someone self identifies as a fun sponge?
We shouldn’t judge.
It could have turned funny though.
Maybe that was the problem, the op did come across as a bit deranged, maybe mocking her wasn't the right thing to do.
Still convinced they were a journo though.
[i]perchypanther wrote:[/i]
Maybe someone self identifies as a fun sponge?
spongephobic
/revision/latest?cb=20121014113150
"Women have very little idea of how much men hate them."
Still convinced they were a journo though.
It is also the technique employed by Russia, and Cambridge analytics etc to spread division, fear, blame and ultimately hatred.
What if self id affected men, could we could discuss it then?
Forget chromosones a true test of gender is "would you willingly shop for curtains? "
"And yet it moves"
As gender is a social construct then we shouldn't be encouraging anybody to identify as any gender. We should all be individuals. There, problem solved.
The last thing this Forum needs is another ranting woman.
You mean self identifies as a ranting woman. 🙄
What can I say, I'm flawed.
After watching the shape of water, I identify as a fish bro.
FOMO is for realz, blud
Did I miss something juicy?
The deletion of the thread was a shameful and cowardly act. It would have been more understandable if the thread had been locked and a moderator had posted an explanation of why it had been closed, but simply to erase it and pretend it never existed was an act of censorship and suppression of free speech in the finest Orwellian tradition.
The deletion of the thread seems to be consistent with the continuing efforts of those supporting the concept of self ID to prevent and frustrate a proper public debate of the issues and the potential consequences of the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act.
If anything, the attempts to shut down the debate, and the intimidation by activists of those women who are raising objections, makes me think that the likes of rachelgreep are right to be concerned. Those who want self ID to become law are unable to make a case for it which will stand up to proper scrutiny, and are instead trying to prevent rational public discussion of the issues.
Pretty sad it got shut down, transgenderism is something really close to me and my family.
Perhaps if the OP had introduced herself properly and tried to raise it as a topic to discuss instead of going n to full rant mode from the off, it would have maybe set the tone for a proper discussion instead of people taking the pee.
Back on topic: what bike/tyres/coffee maker/Audi/woodburner for women with cocks/men with tits?
Its not censorship nor any repression of free speech. Some of you don't get this. This is a privately owned playground. It is not a democracy. If you want to shout your opinions from the rooftops you are perfectly entitled to set up your own forum to do so. STW is under no obligation to provide a platform for you
TJ, the fact that it's a private site doesn't mean that this isn't censorship, just that it's the management's choice to censor as they see fit
(granted, I didn't see the mystery thread so that ^ 's a general comment)
Thats not the point and its not censorships strictly anyway. Censorship would be somone else telling STW to take it down.
Its not censorship nor any repression of free speech. Some of you don’t get this. This is a privately owned playground. It is not a democracy. If you want to shout your opinions from the rooftops you are perfectly entitled to set up your own forum to do so.
TJ mansplaining (badly).
This place really has hit the skids.
STW is under no obligation to provide a platform for you
We are all very aware of that fact.
STW is under no obligation to provide a platform for you
And are more or less people creating content for STW now ?
Jamie - so folk seem to not realise this - many a cry of " what happend to free speech" when threads get closed
Oh - and its not manspalining when its men I am educating 😉
I think you're taking a fairly narrow definition there TJ; I'd suggest that removal, alteration or suppression of content by anyone in a position to do so would constitute censorship
No point in quibbling over semantics though; I'll accept "high-handed and patronising" if you prefer
(unless the content was in some breach of the law, of course - then we can probably have your definition of censorship)
It is not a democracy. If you want to shout your opinions from the rooftops you are perfectly entitled to set up your own forum to do so. STW is under no obligation to provide a platform for you
For democracy to exist, people need to be able to express and hear or read facts and opinions, especially so if they are controversial or contentious, and equally they need to be able to hear or read challenges of those facts and opinions. Any business or organisation that is part of - or facilitates - such public debate, such the media, the BBC, Facebook, Twitter, and yes even STW, has a public and moral duty to protect free speech. STW has already taken a stance on the Daily Mail, by refusing to allow direct links to its website, but it has been quite open and honest about this and its ethical reasons for doing so .
Thats not the point and its not censorships strictly anyway. Censorship would be somone else telling STW to take it down.
When the media, commentators and others are afraid to raise or confront difficult issues and question a prevailing orthodoxy, that is a far more effective and insidious form of censorship than any crude government instruction not to publish something.
For example, consider this BBC article on the attempted murder of a UK Athletics official:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-37439875
The article completely omits to explain that the attacker was a transwoman, and that the official was investigating an accusation that the attacker had not been eligible to compete as a woman when he won the English women's fell running championship. These were matters of fact which were known to the BBC at the time it published the article, but it deliberately chose to suppress them. Only after conviction and sentencing did the truth come out:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-39266777
Edited to correct the first article linked.
At present, there are rules: to designate yourself female you need to live as a woman for at least two years and have your transition confirmed by a doctor ... The MPs pushing for reform hope to amend the 2004 Gender Recognition Act to mean that any man who declares ‘I am a woman’ will have full access to all the rights, protections and places that women have fought for and won over the past century.
Wherever you stand on the question of self id there is a debate that needs to happen and it isn't happening because -
'a small, aggressive group of activists — not all of them trans, by the way — want to establish a new norm of debate: that anyone who disagrees with them, or even asks questions, ought to be silenced, sacked or both.'
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/transgender-activists-and-the-real-war-on-women/
Been on a bender with a barmaid half my age, what did I miss? 😀
A full on rant by a first time lady poster about trans people who thought that STW was the place to do it.
Personally , some of the words were a bit choice even though they passed the swear filter.
No doubt they were directed at a hypothetical person but when I read them I thought of someone on this forum. Someone I’ve never met but she seems like a thoroughly decent person , Someone who has never rubbed anyone on here up the wrong way. Someone who I deem the most punk rock on here.
I’m glad the thread was deleted even though it had the potential to turn out funny.
No one was nasty to the OP .
Edit: Sodding cocking stupid forum/user.
Oh – and its not manspalining
No doubt they were directed at a hypothetical person but when I read them I thought of someone on this forum. Someone I’ve never met but she seems like a thoroughly decent person , Someone who has never rubbed anyone on here up the wrong way. Someone who I deem the most punk rock on here.
So because of you projecting, and placing our mutual friend in the crosshairs when she probably wasn’t intended to be there, the OP had to be incorrect/deleted?
Seems a bit harsh.
I just assumed it had been deleted due to the repeated use of cock and clit. Still, some folk need to see conspiracy in everything.
It didn’t have to be deleted but it’s deletion was not unexpected given that it was really just Spam.
If the EU thread was deleted I’d also be happy with that.
My first thread on here was asking about servicing a Reba.
Ive been deciding to not start as many threads away from riding bikes type stuff.
It's me wanting to come here for bikes stuff, adventures stuff and fun - not thousands of posts arguing about Brexit...
Only after conviction and sentencing did the truth come out:
It's not unusual for reporting to be limited during a trial, even if certain facts are public.
I just assumed it had been deleted due to the repeated use of cock and clit. Still, some folk need to see conspiracy in everything.
Then add the offending words to the swear list, or edit the post.
Nuking from orbit just seems heavy handed, especially given what the post was about.
Why not start a thread on the topic Jamie? It clearly means quite a lot to you.
Helpful as always, Drac.
I’ve made a suggestion, you’ll note I didn’t delete your thread even though it breaks the rules.
So once again why not actually start a topic on the original post?
I remember the old Jamie he was funny.
Yeah Jamie, why don't you start a thread on the topic of the thread that was deleted instead of starting a thread inquiring politely as to why the previous thread was deleted? I'll tell you why, because you know that you'll be outed for the transmisogynist, shemale hating, Daily Mail reading, Brexit voting, cis gender, binary Nazi piece of privileged white male patriarchal scum you are!
I'll bet that you can't even admit that Caitlyn Jenner is fabulous and brave, but we all know that you absolutely would. Wouldn't you!!!?
I miss the funny pictures.
I miss the fun
Can I get - member opposite my name removed please? I feel that it misgenders me as I'm more...pangender and I don't want the toxicity of a euphemism for PENIS so close to my identity. If you can't comply with this it's a breach of my human rights and is in fact a violent assault.
How do you think I feel having subscriber next to mine?
I am not he, nor master, nor lord
No crown to wear, no cross to bear in stations
I am not he, nor shall be, warlord of nations
These heroes have run before me
Now dead upon the flesh piles, see?
Waiting for their promised resurrection, there is none
Nothing but the marker, crown or cross, in stone upon these graves
Promise of the ribbon was all it took
Where only the strap would leave it's mark upon these slaves
What flag to thrust into this flesh
Rag, bandage, mop in their flowing death
Taken aside, they were pointed a way, for god, queen and country
Now in silence they lie
They ran beside these masters, children of sorrow
As slaves to that trilogy they had no future
They believed in democracy, freedom of speech
Yet dead on the flesh piles
I hear no breath, I hear no hope, no whisper of faith
From those who have died for some others' privilege
Out from your palaces, princes and queens
Out from your churches, you clergy, you christs
I'll neither live nor die for your dreams
I'll make no subscription to your paradise
I'll make no subscription to your paradise
I'll make no subscription to your paradise
I'LL MAKE NO SUBSCRIPTION TO YOUR PARADISE
How do you think I feel having subscriber next to mine?
Deeply and profoundly embarrassed.
We should all be individuals.
"I'm not".
Anyway for what it's worth this old man thinks gender is far more complex than which sexual organs are on display (privately of course).
Can I get – member opposite my name removed please? I feel that it misgenders me as I’m more…pangender and I don’t want the toxicity of a euphemism for PENIS so close to my identity.
They’ve missed a trick: subscribers should be called gold members. This would more accurately reflect their P-ness status.
jez everybody knows by now in 2018 you don't have a say unless its fitting to the current policies and agenda. free speech died before 1980.
I miss the funny pictures.
I just didn't feel appreciated as a content creator.
However, being a human blackhole that sucks all the joy out of the room seems to be rewarded, so decided to go that route instead.
transmisogynist, shemale hating, Daily Mail reading, Brexit voting, cis gender, binary Nazi piece of privileged white male patriarchal scum!
That's what it says on my business card.
Been on a bender with a barmaid half my age, what did I miss?
You missed her setting up a STW login and creating quite a stir.
It’s not unusual for reporting to be limited during a trial, even if certain facts are public.
kcr, I realised too late that I had phrased my post badly, partly because I had initially found and posted the wrong link for the first article. The first article was published AFTER she had pleaded guilty, and the facts in question were then included in press reports by other media organisations, but not by the BBC. I remember reading that first article at the time and finding it very odd: why would an athlete make an extremely violent attack on a UK Atheletics official? When I then read another article from a different media source, it became clear not only why the attack had happened, but also that the BBC had very deliberately chosen to suppress the facts.
No doubt they were directed at a hypothetical person but when I read them I thought of someone on this forum. Someone I’ve never met but she seems like a thoroughly decent person , Someone who has never rubbed anyone on here up the wrong way. Someone who I deem the most punk rock on here.
I had no idea that she was a transexual until she herself mentioned it in a thread. It would be interesting to hear her views on this subject, since I understand that some transexuals who have spoken out about the issue are themselves against self ID, and reject what the so called trans activists stand for and are campaigning for. However, I could understand her keeping her head below the parapet on this issue, since a) she might want to avoid becoming 'defined' by this particular argument and reduced to being STW's resident token transexual and b) those transexuals who have spoken out against self ID etc. are being aggressively targeted by the trans activists.
One of the points that the OP made in her first post on the deleted thread, was that lesbians are being told by trans activists that they are transphobic if they refuse to have sex with a transwoman. Transwomen in this case means men who have not had gender reassignment surgery, but who 'self identify' as women, in particular as lesbian women - lesbian women who happen to have a penis. From what I understand, many lesbians are unhappy about this, but as a vulnerable minority themselves are finding themselves isolated because many others in their communities, e.g. the LBGT community, upon whom they would normally rely for support and solidarity, are supporting the trans activists.
For a transwoman to believe that a woman should have sex with them, even if she doesn't want to, sounds like a very male view. They might just as well go the whole hog and say that lesbians who won't have sex with them are frigid.
So with regard to zippykona's implicit point, I believe that there is at least one lesbian member of STW. Maybe she/they too are not unaffected by this issue, and maybe we should similarly be concerned about how this issue affects them. Again it would be interesting to hear their views on the issue, but I similarly suspect they too might understandably want to keep their head below the parapet.
Which brings us to the bizarre situation where we are now on STW, where only a bunch of mostly middle aged blokes without any direct interest in the issue - and to whom the whole thing seems crazy - feel able to discuss the subject without fear of being targeted and attacked on social media or elsewhere.
transmisogynist, shemale hating, Daily Mail reading, Brexit voting, cis gender, binary Nazi piece of privileged white male patriarchal scum!
I prefered the old days when we were just male chauvinist pigs. Rolls of the tongue better.
It's not just an issue of interest to ranting women; a number of trans women want to debate the proposed legislative changes too.
See eg Miranda Yardley and Debbie Hayton in The Times
It might come as a surprise to some on here that in any community, there are always some people with extreme views.
Of course there are some people who feel that those who identify differently to the gender they were assigned at birth are somehow “wrong” and shouldn’t be able to enjoy normal life. There are also those that take the other extreme. Frankly, it’s all a bit handbags at dawn, if you ask me.
The actual proposed changes in gender recognition will make absolutely no difference to anyone here. Trans people will continue to use the services of the gender they identify with as they have done for years and years, quite legally. Chances are, you’ll never even notice.
There are real problems faced by trans people, though. You might want to listen to Paris on QT the other night...
https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/976965765441011712
Oh - and I don’t even like punk 😉
Rachel
Oh – and I don’t even like punk
STW is under no obligation to provide a platform for you
But without you the place would ve ****ing empty
The actual proposed changes in gender recognition will make absolutely no difference to anyone here.
Unless anyone here's a biological woman. The proposed changes will remove the very limited exemptions under the Equality Act allowing spaces, services, roles and activities for biological women eg domestic violence refuges, single-sex hospital wards, rape crisis centres, women’s prisons, sport and statistics.
Oh – and I don’t even like punk 😉
Rachel
Jamie
🙂
The mumsnet feminism chat pages are dominated by this topic.
https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights
dear god , that mumsnet is a scary place.
Yes, it's quite something alright.
There are real problems faced by trans people, though. You might want to listen to Paris on QT the other night…
I watched that, but the person speaking didn’t appear to say anything useful, other than dismiss the concerns of ‘women’.
Sorry, I missed this drama as I've been away for a couple of days.
I haven't read the post in question. I believe I know why it was deleted though, and it's nothing to do with "censorship" or any other conspiracy theory one might care to dream up. It was removed because as a user's first post on a mountain biking forum it appeared suspicious. We get people all the time signing up for a bit of free self-promotion or to further their own agenda, and they get removed also.
If it's a topic you wish to discuss, feel free to start a thread about it. I think I'm going to close this one shortly.
Sbob Member
Been on a bender with a barmaid half my age, what did I miss?
Cougar Subscriber
Sorry, I missed this drama as I’ve been away for a couple of days.
This is how rumours start.
f it’s a topic you wish to discuss, feel free to start a thread about it. I think I’m going to close this one shortly.
Why does the secret mod not just post a note saying as much? Using a generic mod account maybe?
You might have noticed the odd bit of grumbling about the forum’s direction recently, so surely anything that can be done to alleviate things is helpful?
For what it’s worth, the astroturfy nature had been raised in the thread, and OP answered it fairly it seems.
Bottom line, and I know I am pissing in the wind, if a thread has 20 replies and people have taken the time to engage then it would just be nice to explain why posts get nuked. Just seems bad manners otherwise.
May we have the old Jamie back please?
For what it’s worth, the astroturfy nature had been raised in the thread, and OP answered it fairly it seems.
By absolutely NOT being a Daily Mail journalist.
By absolutely NOT being a Daily Mail journalist.
If they’re undercover and you ask them are they a Journalist they have to tell you. I seen it on Bad Boys.
Been on a bender with a barmaid half my age,
We don't call people benders any more.
There are real problems faced by trans people, though. You might want to listen to Paris on QT the other night…
Freedom is hard won and easily lost.
Personally, I genuinely don't care if some people can't cope. Open minds benefit everyone.
Not fussed how people wish to identify. I know precisely one transexual woman, my ex boss, and she was a genuine inspiration.
Ex Parachute Regiment (really, the only tattoo she didn't have removed) - she'd still be a fantastic person however she identified and she taught me a hell of a lot about self belief.
I could not care less about which changing room someone uses or which nightclub bog they prefer.
Instead of the rest of us getting all judgy, how about we just ask trans people what they want, then do that?
Cake. Cake and a new bike, please 👍☺️
Rachel
Some people are easily pleased. ☺
Glad you're still here.