MNHQ now email posters with how to "get around" the talk guidelines.(401 Posts)
MNHQ have commented on this thread.
There is yet another thread on FWR about trans people. Like nearly every other thread on there about trans people, it's a load of transphobia dressed up as gender analysis.
Nothing new, sadly.
What is new, is that MNHQ have now sent an email to a poster whose post was deleted, telling them how their post could be within the guidelines, even including a copy of their original post to make editing all the easier. This is because "discussion is important".
So, a few questions for MNHQ.
Are GLBT rights at all important to you?
Will you be extending this " How to bend the talk guidelines" services to racist, homophobic, or disabilist posts too, or is it only trans people who deserve to be discussed in a manner which is extremely offensive?
Apologies, Norman Spack sent the children Thailand for the surgery and gave cross sex hormones to at least one child at the age of 13. www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2235781/Jackie-Green-Transgender-beauty-queen-praises-amazing-family-ahead-BBC-documentary.html
Puberty blockers haven't been studied enough to be deemed safe. They do give children cross sex hormones from the age of 16 which can have irreversible effects (including sterilisation) and they do full SRS on 18 year olds. Norman Spack used to do full SRS on under 18s before it was made illegal recently.
Exactly. No doctor would sterilise a teenager who was sure they'd never want kids but there are doctors who will sterilise children who are sure they're the wrong sex. It's madness.
My eyes may well be deceiving me, but I cant see transphobia as being added to the Talk Guidelines. The Talk Guidelines havent been changed since Mar 2014.
I am of an age where I take anything that a teenager says and does with a bit of a pinch of salt.
That is such a big decision at an early age.
It is very sad, I hope he realised it wasn't for him before any lasting damage was done and that he can live a normal life. I know he's not the only trans teenager to detransition. In a decade or so there'll be hundreds of people asking why it was done to them as children and everyone involved will be rushing to blame someone else.
It does happen settingsitting - it's called detransitioning. It's hard to tell how frequent it is though because it's not something that transactivists like to be talked about (they say it's only 1-3% but this blog reckons it's more like 30% but I don't know where they got their figures from). Ria/Bradley Cooper is a good example. He got his 15 minutes of fame in 2010 for being Britain's youngest sex change patient but was living as Bradley again by the end of 2012. If you google detransition you'll find loads of examples.
Does a transwoman ever go back to being a man?
Beachcomber. If anyone whatsoever reports, and mumsnet deletes, then the person reporting got it right!
It had to have at least been questionable, and mumsnet decided to delete.
Anything whatsoever can get reported by anyone, to mumsnet. The reporter most certainly do not need to look to themselves!
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
I also want to post a heartfelt thank you to the women here who have posted so eloquently on the subject of my point number 1.
Turnip and FloraFox agreed entirely.
For decades of my life I've considered myself a trans ally, as trans people were my political siblings, another part of the LGBT umbrella. In the past couple of years, because of the way that trans activism has developed into something seriously appropriative and misogynistic, I've completely reversed a lifetime's solidarity, and now think the "LGBT" acronym is a nonsense because so much mainstream trans activism is deeply, deeply homophobic. I've gone from being someone who would have been utterly horrified to be considered transphobic, to someone who thinks I'm in pretty good company if people like giagia, glosswitch, etc all are also labelled as such.
I was really nervous of challenging the bullshit for a long time, but (as I've said elsewhere on MN) my tipping point was where I saw a trans activist respond (completely unchallenged by any other trans activists or allies) to a post about FGM, not by offering solidarity, but by calling it "cissexist" on the grounds that men have vulvas too, so Female Genital Mutilation is transphobic as a term. That's some really fucked-up narcissism and misogyny, right there.
1. GoshAnneGorilla. It appears that my point about women having the humility to listen to other women's heartfelt analysis of complex issues which are deeply important to them, and disagree respectfully if they disagree, hasn't been listened to. Other women have elaborated on why making women out to be akin to facists, racists and homophobes is offensive and why it is used to try to give weight to empty argument. It is a discrediting move, not a very subtle one, and one that has been used on radical feminists and other women, since forever. It really bothers me to see women use it on other women, I think it is a disgrace and I wish that feminists who disagree with other feminists, particularly in the area of the politics of sex and gender, wouldn't do it. I think it is worthy and laudable to stand up for others and to speak out when one thinks others are wrong, especially if one is in a minority . And it is because I think it is worthy and laudable that I think it is vital to do so honestly and without rhetorical trickery or deeply offensive devices.
2. "To state that if someone has a minority opinion, they shouldn't report posts"
I didn't state that. You directly asked me do you mean not to report , to which I answered no. It is there in plain writing for anyone to see. Please do not misrepresent me like this again GoshAnneGorilla or I will report you.
3. GoshAnneGorilla, MNHQ have quite clearly, openly and honestly stated that they are not an authority on transphobia, and I believe you are on the thread where they stated it. Since all this has happened I went back and read HQ's email to me quite carefully and this is what I think. I think the person who reported my post argued to MNHQ why they found it offensive. Which is fair enough - I have done that myself as HQ cannot be expected to be experts about everything, and sometimes it isn't obvious why a post is beyond the pale. The problem I have with it is that I think they argued that I said something I didn't. I think they stated how they interpreted what I said and argued that that was offensive. And the reason I think that is because the things that HQ said I couldn't say, were not precisely what I had said. They were subtly different. Actually not that subtly now I have looked at them properly. I think I am going to have to take this up with MNHQ, which is not something I would normally bother to do but considering the proportions all this has taken on, I think I will bother.
Gosh - It was someone else's question. Sorry, but I don't believe you. if a hairy man with a bulge in his little Speedo bathing suit came to your Muslim women's pool session, at a time when there are no other men in the pool because none of you would be caught dead in a bathing suit around a man, I don't believe for a second that you all would be A-OK with that because "Oh but he feels like a woman so it's all fine".
I haven't read all of Mohammad's hadiths, but I really doubt there is one that goes "Muslim women must hide their hair, bosom, legs etc from the view of men outside of their immediate family, except if those men say they feel like women and not men"
'After trying to explain that you have no fear or hatred for transwomen and think they should have legal protections that don't erode women's rights, you he talked transphobic for even wanting to discuss it. At the point, you shrug you shoulders and think "whatever, call me what you like'
Definitely, definitely. When you see even people who are doing their best to take a neutral stance, or even worked actively for transpeople, or are trans themselves, called transphobic or a bigot because they've used terminology not approved by one group of transpeople, you just think 'well I'd be in good company.'
MNHQ have said they are not an authority, hence their unwillingness to set forth guidelines or an ethos.
It's losing currency with the women it's directed at. I see this and I experienced it myself. It feels shocking as a feminist to be called "phobic" having spent years supporting lesbian and gay people and issues, standing against right wing abortion activists and standing against racism. That's the point though isn't it? After trying to explain that you have no fear or hatred for transwomen and think they should have legal protections that don't erode women's rights, you he talked transphobic for even wanting to discuss it. At the point, you shrug you shoulders and think "whatever, call me what you like, I can still see the Emperor has no clothes".
Beach - What does humility have to do with if a post breaks talk guidelines or not? I am not an authority, but MNHQ are and anyone is entitled to report posts as they wish. To state that if someone has a minority opinion, they shouldn't report posts is heading towards dodgy ground.
Flora "The word is losing currency" According to whom?
Cote - I missed your question, but no, it wouldn't bother me, because to me a trans woman is a woman.
Gosh - Will you answer the earlier question about whether, as a Muslim woman who believes you must cover your body on front of men outside your immediate family, you would be OK with a male-bodied person who says "I feel like a woman" joining your women-only swimming class in your local pool?
I think it's a disgrace to use terms like facist, homophobic, racist to abuse women who are clearly not facist, homophobic or racist. You're trying to ratchet up the moral currency on the word "transphobia". If anything, it's having the opposite effect. The word is losing currency. People arguing against racism don't say "you're just like a homophobe" if someone is a racist and don't say "you're just like a racist" if someone is a homophobe. These concepts stand on their own and have long histories of people challenging the status quo and discussing why the status quo was wrong to think black people were lesser etc. Transactivists are generally unable to get people to accept that being a woman or a man is simply a matter of subjective feelings. It's a faith-based position that goes against observable facts and people's lived experience. That's why they have to shout down anyone who asks whether the Emperor is wearing clothes with accusations of transphobia and they have to appropriate social justice movements based on race or sexuality because their own theories bear no scrutiny.
GoshAnneGorilla, yes it seems we will have to agree to disagree.
I don't agree with personally attacking people via offensive comparisons, simply because one happens to disagree with them.
I repeat, you are not an authority on what transphobia is and on what other women are allowed to talk about.
By reflect, do you mean not to report any future posts for transphobia, because lots of posters have the same views as you anyway?
Nope. I mean consider that no one MNer is an authority on gender politics and when the majority of women are all saying the same thing perhaps that one person should have the humility to listen to them, and, if they continue to disagree, do so respectfully.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.