"Mumsnet statement on moderation with regard to..."

[RaveOnThisCrazyFeeling]

@MNHQ, I am wondering if the statement sticky at the top of this section needs a new, more accurate, less misleading title.

A large part of the difficulty that women encounter in discussing these issues comes from the framing of the issue as being about 'trans rights'. This implies that feminists are arguing against the equal rights of trans people, which of course isn't the case at all. It also disregards the fact that women and their rights have any stake in the issues being discussed - it makes it all about trans people having rights, or not having rights, and to the casual, uninformed observer that reinforces the TRA narrative that women are a privileged class denying the rights of oppressed transwomen.

In fact, women are the historically and systemically disadvantaged sex class, and so ha e a very large stake in legal and social understanding of sex and gender.

Might you give some consideration to changing the thread name (and OP as appropriate) to "...discussion of sex and gender" rather than "discussion of trans rights"?

[SawingForTeens]

I agree, we center woman here, surely, and discuss sex and gender. Spot on OP. The trans issues shoulder their way in invariably, because the TRAs think that is what matters. We only worry about trans rights when they encroach on women's rights.

[Fallingirl]

Absolutely agree, op.

Ideally the title should be “with regard to discussion of women’s rights”, but that might be too unpalatable to MNHQ, so a good compromise would be “sex and gender”, as suggested.

[JellySlice]

Supported.

We discuss issues of sex and gender, one aspect of which is trans rights. The rules are applied to all the issues we discuss, not just to trans rights, therefore should be clearly indicated.

[Sexnotgender]

Totally agree.

[Cwenthryth]

+1 also

[Becles]

Agree

[BatShite]

Also agreed.

I find it annoying when its framed as women being 'anti-trans' rather than..well pro-women.

[OhHolyJesus]

This is great suggestion, supported.

[YourOpinionIsNoted]

Yes, "discussion of sex and gender rights" or similar.

[PragmaticWench]

Agree entirely, it's misleading and rather inappropriate.

[BoneAppleTeaa]

Agreed, please update this MNHQ

[GrinitchSpinach]

This makes sense to me.

[Somerville]

YY

[PencilsInSpace]

I agree. This is a great suggestion and very simple to do.

What do you think, @MNHQ?

[HumphreyCobblers]

I agree, this seems a good idea.

[Cuntysnark]

Yup me also.

[EmpressLesbianInChair]

Me too.

[JanesKettle]

It makes me feel, as a female and a mother of kids with ROGD, that our rights are entirely subordinate to the rights of the TRA's, and I find it subtly triggering each time I log on.

It's inappropriate that in an area of Mumsnet set aside for discussion of feminism and women's rights - WOMEN's rights - that we are asked every single time to prioritise the needs of another group of people in all conversations we have here.

It's deeply ironic that only in Feminism chat, do women have to efface themselves in order to continue to post.

I doubt it will be moved or amended. Its purpose is to reassure advertisers, I assume, and the response, if any, will be 'if you don't like it, go well elsewhere'. Not taking into account that our 'elsewheres' are extremely limited. For example, there is no public message board in AU where I can discuss ROGD and the best way to help our kids with ROGD.

So far as I'm aware, the only alternative (other than Spinster and Glindr, which are not public message boards) is GC Reddit, where the risk of abuse and doxxing is higher, imo.

[BSJohnson]

What they all said!

[Ibloodylovewomen]

I have thought the same many times.

[Gizmo79]

Ridiculous that this needs to even be stated. Completely agree.

[PencilsInSpace]

Great post, JanesKettle.

It's inappropriate that in an area of Mumsnet set aside for discussion of feminism and women's rights - WOMEN's rights - that we are asked every single time to prioritise the needs of another group of people in all conversations we have here.

It's deeply ironic that only in Feminism chat, do women have to efface themselves in order to continue to post

Yes.

Every time we click on FWR the very first thing we see is 'trans rights'. The only reason we're discussing this at all is because of the impact on women's rights and child safeguarding and wellbeing.

[Qcng]

This is an idea I entirely agree with.

We're not here discussing "trans rights" for the most part, we're discussing the wholesale erosion of women's rights at the hands of powerful orgs like Stonewall, The US / UK government, etc.

Framing it as being about "trans rights" is missing the point rather.

[JolyonsChickensAreBigots]

Completely agree with the proposal for more accurate title