Would MNHQ consider extending the definition of "misgendering"

Are we allowed tell people who have come here from other forums to tell us that we're wrong and go on about how it's fine for them to use women's facilities because they pass as women that they actually don't pass?

Thank you Rebecca.

So if I call Caitlyn Jenner a he it will not be removed?

I've been thinking about this. Usually we are allowed to be less polite about people in the public eye (politicians, celebrities etc.) than we are about MNers.

IMO it's totally wrong that people are deleted for 'misgendering' for e.g. Republican Jenner, or the person who was refused access to Primark's female changing rooms. It has to be possible for people to look at a linked article and state their opinion without having to pretend that what is clearly a man is actually a woman. Not to be permitted to do so puts us firmly in 'emperor's new clothes' territory and is a massive massive headfuck.

'Misgendering' someone on MN is different I think - different rules of etiquette apply. Lots of things we say about people in the public eye would be deleted as PA's if directed at MNers and I think it's fair enough that posts are deleted if that's happening - as long as the same courtesy is extended towards those of us who object to 'cis'.

Thanks Rebecca,

That seems a sensible position to have reached - I also hope more people read the threads in Chat. There are lots of interesting links on them - I've realised I was very uneducated about the whole thing and had naively taken what I thought was the correct stance on transgender issues. Through reading MN threads I have done more research and had a 180 degree turn. So thank you once again to those with the patience to explain yet again what the real issues are.

So if I call Caitlyn Jenner a he it will not be removed?

Thank you

Thanks Rebecca.

Thank you

Thanks for this, Rebecca.

Thanks Rebecca.

I agree annie

I would be more than happy with a "we are discussing and will get back to you when we have an answer"

It's the radio science I have a problem with

But happy that bore took one for the team and got a reply

I have to say, I am fine with MNHQ taking whatever time they need, as they've been better on letting us get on with this discussion than most other boards out there. Asking not to be called "cis" would have us banned and deleted (and hounded from the internet) on plenty of other places.

We do create content (without users MN would not be the thing it is) but we are still playing in someone else's sandbox.

Have had response from MNHQ to say they are

"currently discussing the 'misgendering' thread and will be posting soon.
We are really sorry for the delay on this."

Hi MNHQ

Can we please have a response to this thread - specifically to the use of the term 'cis', which many of us object to.

Thanks

BOW

BUMP...FUCKING...BUMP

The name of the game is to double down on who is the most "oppressed" and who can claim the most umbrage. In a world without free speech the only defence is to curtail your rivals' speech as well.

So, if I can't call Jenner a "he", then I don't want anyone calling me "cis."

Seems fair enough. Tit for Tat. Why should their group get special protection at my expense?

Agreed queen

I'd just like someone at MNHQ to show some manners and basic respect and respond to the question

It's a yes, or a no, or a "we need more time to think about it"

We're on to a loser here. I reported all the posts on the other site stuff thread where gender critical feminists are called cis, hateful, bigotted etc or compared with BNP members or homophobes. About 12 posts in all (and I didn't even bother with the more oblique insults) and it was all left to stand.

Bumping

Bumptiddleybump bump..bump! Bump!

Surely even if you agree with what people want cis to mean - that someone's biological sex matches their internal gender identity, you are at risk of misgendering someone every single time you use it, because you can't know what someone's internal gender identity is unless they have specifically told you?

For example, if I called someone a transwoman, and they came back and said 'don't call me that, I'm genderfluid, you're misgendering me'. I would apologise (else be labelled as a TERF, might happen anyway). But if someone called me a cis-woman and I said 'don't call me that, you don't know what my internal gender identity is' I suspect I would be told to check my cis-privilege and then labelled a TERF.

When I use the term woman, I use it to mean a biological category. Human female person. The opposite to trans is not cis. The opposite to trans is biological man or woman.

And funnily enough, there aren't huge populations of men talking about finding the best way to redefine their biological reality to be accepting of transmen.

Consider yourself lucky that you at least got an answer by email. I never did.

I reported a CIS post the other day

Mumsnet told me they would look at it and then put their decision on the thread (or words to that effect, I can't remember exactly what they said)

They haven't yet

Yes, MNHQ, can we please have answers: will you delete posts when 'cis', or indeed 'cissy', is being used as a pejorative? When someone purposefully misgenders you using cis when you have objected to the term?

I consider the term cis a misogynistic slur when applied to women.

I am not cisgender. Gender = sex role. I do not agree with sex roles. Gender is also a hierarchy and I do not agree that girls and women should be awarded lower value and status than boys and men. Gender = lady brain. I do not have a lady brain I have a human brain.

I particularly refuse to be called cis by men. (TiggyD please take note and don't cis me.)

I do not wish to be referred to as cis.

That is not my gender identity.