Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Thoughts on MNHQ's response to the Spartacus thread

991 replies

OlennasWimple · 30/08/2016 22:23

As the Spartacus thread is about to reach capacity, here's a new thread to discuss MNHQ's response to the issues raised on that thread and in a few other places over the last week or so.

is lesphobic to insist that a lesbian likes penis. Feck off with that shite.
Add message | Report | Message poster KateMumsnet (MNHQ) Tue 30-Aug-16 21:08:00
Hello all

Thanks for all your input on this - we've been listening and thinking hard.

Couple of quick points to clear up: it's actually not the case that people have been banned solely for misgendering - it will have been part of a broader discussion here about whether that poster is able to stick to the rules generally.

We must admit to being slightly taken aback at being cast, by some, as the evil slave-baiting Roman republic in this grin - as lots of you have pointed out, Mumsnet remains one of the few places where these issues can be discussed at all. It would have been much, much easier (both in terms of the resource and the toll on our moderators' sanity!) to shut down the debate as others have done, but instead we are working hard to find a realistic balance between free speech and being a space which welcomes everyone.

From our perspective, the whole issue is pretty much covered by our Talk Guidelines. If people are using sex-at-birth pronouns to provoke, inflame, or belittle, then that's against the rules and will usually have to go. If it happens as part of an otherwise broadly respectful (even if heated) discussion, we look at it in that context and take a view.

Some of you have pointed out a disjunct between allowing posts which mirror mainstream scientific thinking, while asking MNers not to describe a trans woman as 'he'. We can see your point on this,and also accept that there is a fair amount of dodgy stuff on the trans side that can rightly be described as anti-feminist and regressive - but what we'd ask you to think about is the impact on the parent who's not an activist, and likely isn't even posting, but whose adult child is transitioning, or who is doing so themselves. Would they feel belittled, mocked or attacked? Would they think Mumsnet was not for them? If so, we're going to have to remove it. It's a fudge, but it's the best we can do at this stage.

In all but the most extreme headline-grabbing cases, we do think it's possible to debate the core principles without referring to individuals in a way which will cause hurt. Most of you have said that when talking to a trans person face-to-face you wouldn't insist on using birth pronouns or names - and generally, on this and other issues, we encourage people to treat others with the same courtesy they'd use in real life. For every MNer who posts on a thread there are likely to be ten who are lurking - statistically, some of those will be trans or love someone who is, and we need to take account of them too.

We hope that makes our thinking a bit clearer overall. Do continue to tell us your thoughts - it's probably unrealistic to think that this issue will be quickly resolved here or across society as a whole, but it would be brilliant if MN could be part of the solution, we think.

MNHQ

OP posts:
Thread gallery
19
TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 02/09/2016 09:14

Fruit wants people to hate, it's easier to punch down than punch up so go for the TERFs even if it means completely misrepresenting what they actually think.
Or she's just badly informed and just needs to stop listening to TA lies and find out what is actually going on. #benefitofthedoubt

ErrolTheDragon · 02/09/2016 09:01

A bit like discussions on religion threads where people cite 'Answers in Genesis'. Part of the problem is that there are various things where if you google, the top hit is likely to be 'Answers in Genesis' and its ilk - the same thing applies to trans issues but probably much worse because for someone looking for information for the first time it will be less obvious what the biases of a site are.

TwatbadgingCuntfuckery · 02/09/2016 08:59

Errol - that fits perfectly here and tbh, given my past infertility issues I would find it fucking insensitive and dismissive of my needs if a man claimed their infertility was like mine and my infertility issues - related to my ovaries, my female hormone levels, my womb - was alienating. My womb doesn't work. You never bloody hand one. Angry biological fact there.

makeslogicalsensetome2 · 02/09/2016 08:58

Hi. Is there a link between Transgender critical thinking, TERF and Radical Feminism ? I see the last two labels constantly given to women who may just have a point of view that is different from what is considered PC. A male with critical thinking is not considered in the same way.
If I had thoughts that my childs Dr was wrong with a diagnosis, as has happened, I would not be criticized for expressing that and would be allowed to ask for a second opinion.
I also dislike being called Cis.
Why is it ok to call someone a nasty name just for expressing an opinion or a preference? :-)

microferret · 02/09/2016 08:53

I think it's increasingly clear that Fruit gets all her information about women like us from the trans lobby and isn't interested in listening to what we're saying at all. A perfect example of the regressive left - close your ears, shut down your reasoning abilities, submit to the ideology, parrot the approved slogans. We are the Borg, resistance is futile, you will be assimilated. That sort of thing.

IBelieveTheEarthIsFlat · 02/09/2016 08:52

Errol

I know, but wanted to put it in the thread that is proposing to MNHQ that us all to fuck off to a trans area that cab be hidden, because none of this impacts on them. Anyway, it's in both threads now

ErrolTheDragon · 02/09/2016 08:47

If that was a mis-post, it fitted pretty well with the surrounding ones. Julia is not a biological woman so isses pertinent to biological women won't be relevant, obviously.

ErrolTheDragon · 02/09/2016 08:40

Sex simply is a natural binary in humans and most other creatures which reproduce sexually. We're we can't do parthenogenesis, we're not hermaphrodites or sequential hermaphrodites (species which can change sex). Our sex is determined by our genetics, XX or XY, not by environmental factors. Sex is entirely about biology.

This is not a 'belief' - it's scientific fact. That site is simply lying totally mistaken about what gender critical people think.

IBelieveTheEarthIsFlat · 02/09/2016 08:37

Whoops wrong thread Blush

IBelieveTheEarthIsFlat · 02/09/2016 08:33

…but I have to say that as an infertile woman, all this contraception-centric feminism over the last month has been alienating for me…

— Julia Serano (@JuliaSerano) March 3, 2012

This is a transwoman. Claiming infertility as a woman. Tell me this is not bloody nuts. And women talking about their fertility/infertility is alienating to Julia

How well do you think that would go down on the Fertility/conception boards on MN.

Still think we should just shut up?

Lalsy · 02/09/2016 08:31

Yes, exactly. And Fruit, if you want to prove what a group of people think: firstly, proceed with caution as humans are gloriously diverse; and secondly, quote one of the people that do think that (not someone who has utterly misunderstood or deliberately misinterpreted them).

StatisticallyChallenged · 02/09/2016 08:27

Agreeing with Lalsy, that is almost the exact opposite of what gender critical people think (AFAIK) - the whole point is that the only thing that is inate about being a woman (or man) is the physical biological reality of chromosomes and the physical differences resulting from that.

I'd say it's transpeople (as a group) who believe in the male or female essence, hence believing that you can be in the wrong body (i.e. with mismatched essence and body)

Lalsy · 02/09/2016 08:20

Fruit, those links make no sense. The second says "GCF/TERFs are generally sex-essentialists who believe that sex is a natural binary because there exists some undefined male or female essence that is found in all men and women. Sometimes this sexed essence is viewed as habits acquired during early socialization and at other times it is some specific sex attribute.". This is nonsense.

Gender-critical feminists believe that gender is a social construct; it is not innate (how can it be when gendered behaviour varies historically and between countries?). They do not believe in a "sexed essence"; they believe (and are backed by science) that your sex is determined by your chromosomes. That's it. No essences. If you don't believe me, find me a gender-critical source who says that there is an undefined sexed essence. And see what these gender-critical people, some of them trans, have to say about gender. genderapostates.com/

PacificDogwod · 02/09/2016 08:17

What is it with being 'offended' by x, y or z??
Plenty of women with XX chromosomes cannot have children or may not bleed or whatever - I don't see them campaigning as an organised group against contraceptive service/terminations/women's rights in general?!

How very odd. TA comes across as more and more delusional and seems to display disordered thinking IMO.
What is also odd, is that the transpeople I know in RL find it just as odd and do NOT feel represented by the movement.

MW not calling pregnant women 'women'?? WTAF.

TwatbadgingCuntfuckery · 02/09/2016 08:01

www.feministcurrent.com/2015/11/10/why-i-no-longer-hate-terfs/

This. All of this.

FRETGNIKCUF · 02/09/2016 07:51

*Fruit cider
*
Nina passed as a woman???

Thoughts on MNHQ's response to the Spartacus thread
MatildaOfTuscany · 02/09/2016 07:44

Fruit, I'm not suprised you clearly (as evidenced by your posts) don't understand what gender critical means if you're basing it on articles like that pile of shit. I scanned it quickly - it opens by simply asserting "Gender Critical Feminism (GCF) is a euphemism for Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminism (TERF)", then goes on to argue that GCF (sic) posits some form of biological essentialism. No, no, no, that's the whole point that they've got back to front - gender critical views reject the idea that biology (which is binary, that's just how the world is - just like it's round and it goes round the sun) determines neat little bundles of personality traits that go with XX and XY chromosomes. The whole point of being gender critical is to point out that these bundles of personality traits (nurturing, good at languages, ...blah blah) are put together by social pressures, are culturally and historically variable (Medieval England - weaving is a man's job; 19th century Navajo society - weaving is a woman's job) and crucially, function as a mechanism of oppression.

In fact, if anything it is a certain subset of transactivists who are wedded to biological determinism - because unless there are such things as intrinsically feminine characteristics and/or lady-brains, there is no "normal gender" relative to which they can say "see, I really am a woman in the most important sense... my chromosomes are irrelevant."

microferret · 02/09/2016 07:32

See, that's your problem Fruit - following other people's "huge trains of thought" and not doing any thinking for yourself. And it's pretty rich to accuse us of "denying trans people's experiences" when a) you've just ignored the women who tell you they are not radfems and b) the very essence of TA ideology wholly denies the material reality and lived experience of women.

There is a huge train of thought that us TERFS, as you so charmingly call us, should be raped, murdered and die in fires. It doesn't mean that it's a good train of thought. Critical thinking is not automatically hateful, can't you actually see how regressive that viewpoint is? 2 years ago I would NEVER have questioned trans ideology, because I didn't realise how harmful it was. I thought live and let live. I'm not motivated by anything other than a need to protect my own hard-won rights. Ideally a lot of us on here want to come to a middle ground with trans people - we want a solution that can accommodate the rights of everyone, without eroding the protections that women still desperately need. It is shameful of you to scold us in our efforts to do so. You seem to have absolutely nothing constructive to add whatsoever. Why are you here? To tell us what we've already heard a million times before? To play the hero? To feel superior? Why don't you help us find a solution, instead of slinging around insults that you know won't change our minds?

Lalsy · 02/09/2016 07:26

Who is denying the experiences of trans people (quote please)? Experience does not affect your chromosomes.

Plenty of people have said they are not radical feminists - their belief that people cannot change sex rests not on ideology or belief but on verifiable scientific fact, as found in any textbook. I am one such - I exist.

IzzyIsBusy · 02/09/2016 07:21

There's that first rule of misogyny again, that women are responsible for what men do.
Good point. I am always amazed at how many people think this. Women are the root of all evil appatently Hmm

thebewilderness · 02/09/2016 05:28

There's that first rule of misogyny again, that women are responsible for what men do.

FruitCider · 02/09/2016 05:11

Fruit, could you be more specific please? I don't see how labelling people and lumping them together (as RadFems, for example) shows empathy towards people as individuals. I have read many brilliant posts expressing empathy on these threads, and many by people saying they are not radical feminists but women cannot become men.

Honestly? There is a huge train of thought that gender critical feminism - euphemism for trans exclusive radical feminist. Denying the experiences of trans people is not liberal either.

Sorry if some find the links offensive.

http://transadvocate.com/gender-critical-feminism-the-roots-of-radical-feminism-and-trans-oppressionnn_14766.htm

http://uncommon-scents.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/a-terf-comes-clean-about-gender.html?m=1

If you want to read more on this topic, Google is your friend.

FruitCider · 02/09/2016 05:04

And yet you don't remember Nina? I'm peculiar. But you know the radfem in real life who set it up. Bull.shit.

I'm not even going to get into this. Yes I remember Nina. I don't however recall the behaviour you are on about. I remember her coming out and everyone saying she passed as a woman. I then remember a huugggeee transphobic debate about how men should not be allowed in the group. Perhaps I missed the threads you are referring to. I shall ask someone from ALW later.

venusinscorpio · 01/09/2016 22:55

YY Sodthe. Today's "Different View of the Spartacus Thread" post will have been some people's peak trans moment, I rather think. Happy to have those debates, as the entitlement and lack of concern for women came across loud and clear.

IBelieveTheEarthIsFlat · 01/09/2016 22:49

TBH Hairy, I think we just have commit to ourselvess and each other that we are not going to allow this shit and we are not going to shut up, despite the pressure from the TA's on one side and the virtue signallers/oh it's all so boring-ers on the other

Swipe left for the next trending thread