Is Mumsnet HQ evil or not very bright.(596 Posts)
MNHQ have commented on this thread.
As some of you may already know you're allowed to call transgendered women "men in dresses" and refer to them as "he" and "him.
"So some men dressing as women..." as one posted said in relation to trans women got the reply from RebeccaMN:
We agree that this post is in poor taste but we don't tend to delete on those grounds because it would be really hard to know where to draw the line.
The truth is, we don't think we should be the arbiters of what people should find offensive and what they shouldn't. In these instances, it's very rare that a tasteless comment is left unchallenged, and we would highly recommend that you put forward your point of view on the thread.
Well firstly I think Mumsnet should draw the line at discrimination of a protected minority group.
Secondly, if MN don't think they should be the arbiters of what people should find offensive, maybe they should ask a representative from a human rights or anti discrimination group? Misgendering is always wrong.
Thirdly, is it rare an tasteless comment is unchallenged? Now the trans people on Mumsnet refuse to post on trans related threads who the hell is going to challenge them?
Fourthly, that post was unchallenged. Have a look at the thread.
Fifthly, "tasteless"? "TASTELESS"?! WTF? Tofu is tasteless. Would MNHQ describe calling people spastics or coons or faggots as tasteless? Misgendering is a put-down towards an entire minority. Dismissed as tasteless.
A quick look at a quote about the 2010 equality act:
"harassment - unwanted behaviour linked to a protected characteristic that violates someone’s dignity or creates an offensive environment for them".
Is there harassment in trans related threads on here? Is the dignity of all transwomen violated by referring to them all as men in dresses? Bleedingly obviously yes. Does it create an offensive environment for them? How the hell could it not? Does Mumsnet do anything to stop it? No.
It all makes me wonder if the people of MNHQ are deliberately letting all this unkindness and discrimination and harassment go on because they evil, or because they don't know any better.
I think I have it. I reckon it's like the Ricky Gervais thing where he started doing "Mong" faces. All kinds of people told him it was offensive and an unkind name for people with Downs Syndrome but he refused to accept it. I think he thought that as he believed himself to be a good person, and he used the word mong, that mong had to be an acceptable word because he was good. I think it must be like that in MNHQ. They believe themselves to be good people and when they allow people to call transwomen men on thier site it's fine because their belief in themselves being good trumps all the views of the victims.
One question for MNHQ that I alluded to earlier. Have you ever asked any kind of trans, human rights, or anti-discrimination group about how to treat trans people?
A mail from HQ after I reported After Caitlyn jenner was misgendered constantly and deliberately by people who refuse ever to use the correct pronouns:
However, where big celebrities are concerned, we feel we can't really delete for misgendering. As Bruce Jenner, Caitlyn was so well known to so many people, we can see that many fans do have trouble remembering to refer to her using the proper feminine pronouns. We tend only to delete misgendering when we can see that it is aimed squarely at a real (non-celeb) person and done deliberately to offend. - Iona Mumsnet.
Celebs don't count as human now? Not worth treating fairly?
Your title is deliberately offensive. It will put people's backs up and therefore reduces the chance of you getting a decent response.
Another question for HQ. If you had a trans woman working for you and you called her by her previous name and referred to her as "he" and "him" all the time, what would happen?
Is is deliberately offensive or merely tasteless?
Hmm. "As Cassius Clay, Mohammed Ali was so well known to so many people, we can see that many fans do have trouble remembering to refer to him by his chosen name."
Not sure that works. And I suspect the people deliberately misgendering Ms Jennet are not fans.
Why don't you email MNHQ with your concerns?
I have to say i find HQ less and less willing to take a clear stance on anything anymore. Its extremely disappointing. And yes i know it is their site and i know i am welcome to leave but i am also allowed to point out when i think something isnt right and i think they are opting out of making decisions about discrimination. I dont know if its because they arent sure where the line is or are afraid of pissing off too many of those that bandy about the "professionally offended" phrase but either way HQ's lack of action is noticed.
It will just attract people who want to rubber neck before its deleted. You click it to see the car crash, not to contribute to your conversation.
You've reduced your entire argument to trolling. You've raised some good points but they are overshadowed by a stupid title.
I think evil is a very strong word. Do you think people will engage when you use that sort of wording?
What are the other choices? Evil or not bright seem the only possibilities. Can you think of another reason?
Why do we need interference from MN HQ, go over to the dark side if you want ridiculous monitoring, if you find something offensive, state why you believe it so, put your point of view across, discuss and try and educate, we're all adults here, we don't need big brother/sister controlling everything. If someone is being deliberately offensive and ignorant, they're best ignored, not worth even responding to.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
I don't think it's a great idea to post replies to reports on a thread TBH.
I think it's very common to mix up transgender and transvestite in the general population.
It's up to you and anyone else who knows to point out the difference if they want to inform/educate or challenge.
When did I say Nazi? Quote please withdraw that lie.
Ambivalent, ignorant, out of their depth, unsure, misguided, etc., could all be words of choice (given that your view point is that they're wrong).
At what point is a trans individual protected, out of interest? Is it upon their first thought regarding their status? When they make a conscious transition decision? When they first present as their trans-self? When they would be recognised as being trans?
You're being ridiculous and offensive. If you see a post on a thread that you disagree with, then why don't you say something at the time? Complaining about it here won't do anything like as much as quoting the person on the thread and telling them your point of view.
Your title is deliberately inflammatory and your discussion is very aggressive. Any points you have made have been lost by the manner in which you are portraying them.
A reply to a report states the view of Mumsnet. If they are unhappy for people to hear those views, they can't have much faith in them. They must be bad views.
Mumsnet can change the title. And in doing so they'll give me an idea of what they think their position on their allowing of discrimination is.
Twiggy, you have mis-gendered as well with your constant use of 'cis' and it has been allowed to stand; where do you draw the line?
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
You're a regular poster, OP. Why do you continue to use MN if you dislike the administration so much? Genuine question.
I think, tbh, that the aggressive tone on transgenderism threads isn't helped by calling women who had no choice but to be born women 'cis' women as if it's an insult. It makes out that they are somehow responsible for the difficulties transwomen experience.
Join the discussion
Please login first.