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
bakeoffcake · 30/08/2016 23:05

The response by MNHQ is always exactly the same on trains threads.

They have not listened to a single thing we have been saying.

All the discussion is a bloody waste of time. The men are right obviously, why do we wimmin never learn. Hmm

Showmethewaytogohome · 30/08/2016 23:04

Oh and just for clarity just because the word 'cis' was used in research and in some researchers papers/books as a definition is not justification for it's use in every day language - or should we bring back 'negroid' too?

QueenLaBeefah · 30/08/2016 23:04

I am not trans.
I am not CIS.
I am a woman.

TwatbadgingCuntfuckery · 30/08/2016 23:01

Couldn't post it on the other thread but -

Cis is very black and white.

Many activists claim sex and gender isn't black and white.

So why do they insist on using terminology that feeds into these black and white sterotypes when it pigeonholes vast numbers of people because these stereotypes 'shock horror' are the root of many of problems and the one thing we should be fighting against.

I refuse to be 'cis' I am a woman. My gender does not exist. I am me.

WankingMonkey · 30/08/2016 23:01

Further to my post above, I add a link to prove what I said about 'it'

slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2014/06/07/about-that-hate-crime-i-committed-at-university-of-chicago

As no doubt it will be denied that anyone would wish to be known as that. This is batshit crazy and anyone who panders to the pressure is just as bad as the people who deny biology in favour of a lovely fairytale.

Honestly, I suggest all read Dans blog post here, it shows just how ridiculous this whole thing has gotten. I was literally reading with my mouth hanging open last night as I was in shock.

Showmethewaytogohome · 30/08/2016 23:00

Rufu Yes indeed that is what I meant

If one section of the populous is renaming defined words and claiming them for themselves within their circles to empower themselves then fine. (Tho why the word cis would ever be seen as empowerment is beyond me and I don't believe it)

To use that as an argument that the word should then be allowed to define ALL people from that sector of society is dangerous. Especially when it is pushed by a minority onto a majority. Taking that further and into the trans argument that would almost be the same as all white people deciding black people should be called the N word - and then pushed for it to become every day language

That would not be seen as acceptable - so cis is not either

Eebahgumlass · 30/08/2016 22:58

The response is weak. I particularly dislike the sense that it's a race to the bottom and we should be happy about heavily censored debate vs total shut down of debate. And cis is unbelievably offensive.

WaitrosePigeon · 30/08/2016 22:56

I couldn't care less about needing to put the DC's to bed. Bollocks to that. Who replies with that kind of response at 10pm at night? It should have been posted in the morning with someone to do follow up answers for the rest of the morning. Absolute shitty rubbish bollocks that doesn't wash with me.

It just goes to show how far down the list this actually is to MN.

hambo · 30/08/2016 22:56

Can someone pm me the facebook group that was started? If transmumsnet is going to ignore the discussion, I'd love a place where we can all talk .

WankingMonkey · 30/08/2016 22:55

BeyondASpecialSnowflake What great timing for your last post in the previous thread Grin

Anyway, the only real way I can respond to the response is

I am a woman. I reject the term cis same as I would reject a title such as non-white for a black person. I find it fucking offensive and completely unneeded. I have now got to the point where I do not care what offense someone takes to my posts on this matter as it seems no matter what I say offense will be taken. I would rather offend one trans-person than offend near 100% of the site members. I do not wish to offend anyone, but I refuse to call a he a she, even if this means my post might be deleted and I may be banned.

I will continue to call monsters such as Ada Wells a man, and I will not give a hairy crap if any 'parent' of a child struggling with transsexualism (or BDD) is offended by my use of the incorrect pronoun. Last night I read about a transwoman who prefers the term 'it)'. Now really...I find calling anyone it dehumanizing and would refuse to use that term even if someone wanted to be known as it. Sorry...I draw the line somewhere

I also draw the line at refusing to acknowledge basic biology by playing along with fairy stories about men being able to become women. And even moreso...female penises that lesbians must bow down to or be labelled bigots.

So no. Your response is not acceptable really to me as it explains nothing and seems you are pandering to the militant TAs who would like to relabel things such as 'womens health' 'peoples health' and shut us up about natural bodily functions such as periods and child birth. I will ALWAYS be a mother. The word mother is not offensive. if you continue down this road, this is the next thing that will be expected of you. Please rethink the decision you have made.

Peace out.

And I am still Spartacus

IfTheCapFitsWearIt · 30/08/2016 22:55

Cis is offensive vash

Same as the N word, someone black maybe happy to refer to themselves as that. But its not ok to be used by random people to discribe back people. Even if they don't use it in an offensive, derogatory way.

Jeesh its not that hard to grasp.

Cis is offensive regardless of context.

PlectrumElectrum · 30/08/2016 22:54

Piss poor response from MNHQ. Utterly dismissive of every post standing up against the tide of utter insanity that says a man is a women because they say they are, and screw the hard fought for rights & protection women still actually need. Even now. In 2016.

It's actually depressing to realise just how easily so many women's voices can be dismissed so completely.

It actually reads as a clutching at straws spurious argument that in a totally unconvincing way avoids actually addressing the issues that have been very eloquently expressed on a number of threads.

Shambolic effort MNHQ. Utterly inadequate.

RufusTheReindeer · 30/08/2016 22:53

And one assumes that you are going to delete mirandas post re that auto thingy i cant spell and cant be arsed to check

(Sorry miranda)

bakeoffcake · 30/08/2016 22:52

"...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..."

That says it all really Angry

And the "cis" question hasn't been mentioned, despite many, many posts about it.

AnneEyhtMeyer · 30/08/2016 22:52

As I said on the last thread, I am stunned this is considered an adequate response.

I am also cross that it was posted in a "hit and run" way, late in the evening, at the end of a thread, by someone about to go "off duty".

Bad form.

TanTanNubuck · 30/08/2016 22:52

I'm one of the 'others' . A 'non trans person'. I mean seriously WTF is that about? No. I won't accept that. I'm a woman. I'm not cis. I'm a woman. I will not be described as cis.

As for MNHQ. Awful response, agree site should be renamed Transnet. It's disgusting, MN is clearly biased. I don't know why they won't just admit that they're more sympathetic to the TRA viewpoint.

SpecialSnowflake has nailed how ridiculous I find this situation, which is utterly illlogical, with the Donald Trump/Ada Wells statements.

TheMagicFarawaySleep · 30/08/2016 22:51

I posted at the end of the last Spartacus thread, but I am still so annoyed by MNHQ's response.

Once again, It seems as though women are to be thrown under the bus, in order to avoid possible offence to others, with any offence to women being minimised, explained away or downright ignored.

This pandering to a very small, misogynistic group of TRAs (and their mums who might be reading......apparently) is shocking.

I am horrified that a transperson would seriously think it OK to differentiate between sexes using "trans" and "non-trans" as the demarcation. This absolutely smacks of a transperson seeing themselves as the benchmark against which other sexes should be measured. "Non-trans" as a category does not even do men and women the courtesy of being distinguished from each other.

This is the most "othering", self-absorbed and mysogynistic statement I have read during these threads. Absolutely chilling and smacks of male privilege.

RufusTheReindeer · 30/08/2016 22:51

show

I am with you

CIS is ok because there are some people who dont have a problem with being called it...therefore all women are happy with it

My understanding is that some black people call each other the N word. Therefore all black people are happy with it

Is that right? Cos i will start using the N word with abandon

Except i wont....because i am not a cunt

(At least i hope thats what you mean)

Showmethewaytogohome · 30/08/2016 22:50

Vashta I have never met a woman that calls themselves 'cis' you must move in very different circles

The word N*gger is used by some black people to describe other black people. It is not acceptable for white people to use that word is it? Abusive words are abusive words. If your circle uses 'cis' it doesn't mean that cis is not abusive the majority of women

PacificDogwod · 30/08/2016 22:47

I agree that the MNHQ response did not address the actual point of the thread. V wishy-washy and disappointing.

derxa · 30/08/2016 22:45

Heck, there are more MNers who are parents to a gay daughter than a transitioning daughter I hope this debate has persuaded at least one parent out there that encouraging their son or daughter to mutilate their body is not the right thing to do. That parents can learn to accept their children's sexuality and differences.

attacktheblock · 30/08/2016 22:44

Absolutely Olenna

Hundreds of people have been dismissed

mirandayardley · 30/08/2016 22:42

Cross-posting from Spartacus as it addresses a specific block:

^KateMumsNet
and it doesn't explain why posts about autogynephila are consistency zapped.*

Sorry, meant to deal with this before standing down - as far as I know we've deleted one post about autogynephilia, because it implied that this was what motivated most or all trans women. We also deleted a subsequent post which quoted the first.

The fact is though that most cases of male's transition are motivated by autogynephilia. That this is not acknowledged, even flatly denied, causes many of the problems that we have today between transgender males and women.

And I say these words as someone who is themselves transsexual.

IBelieveTheEarthIsFlat · 30/08/2016 22:42

I think the site needs to be renamed Transnet

It will be welcoming to all Non-Trans people of course

VashtaNerada · 30/08/2016 22:41

I'd like MNHQ to be stronger in its support of trans issues but appreciate they need to welcome debate from all sides, so on balance I think their response is pretty good. It would be a shame if either side was completely prevented from posting as (in amongst the insults and stereotyping) we do occasionally have sensible conversations about it.

(IMO it would be ridiculous if they banned 'cis' as lots of us use it to describe ourselves - and yes, that includes men! - but I agree that it shouldn't be used in an insulting way, or used persistently for someone who has already stated they don't like it.)