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

Mumsnet moderation of trans rights and gender critical issues II

744 replies

PermissionToSpeakSir · 13/06/2018 22:54

Follow on from www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/3276551-Mumsnet-moderation-of-trans-rights-and-gender-critical-issues?pg=40&order=

OP posts:
ThisisSparta · 14/06/2018 17:39

(Under His Eye).

I posted a thread a while ago thanking all of the wonderful posters on the FWR board and explaining how you had helped me to understand why we need to fight for women’s rights both abroad and at home - (I had previously argued that as women around the globe were being treated appallingly then it was a bit rich of people to march in London and think they were fighting for women’s rights - (yes i know was wrong !)

It is only through following the FWR boards that I have seen the assault on women’s rights in the UK and how precarious our rights here in the UK in 2018 are.

I have also found the FWR boards to be informative, entertaining, supportive, and just a great place for women to get together to discuss womanhood and feminism! Due to my family situation I can’t attend meetings etc but I can follow and discuss online, and i was so pleased that @MNHQ was providing like-minded women a place to chat, I honestly can’t believe the turn around that’s happened here.

Women are oppressed because of their biology, if we can’t discuss biology we can’t discuss our oppression

Please think about this @MNHQ !

Can anyone give me some GC Reddit links please?

(May the Lord Open)

Amalfimamma · 14/06/2018 17:38

Transwomen without GRCs have the protected characteristic of male sex and the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

Gender reassignment is applied once they start down the transitioning route no? It's not enough to put on pink nail polish and grow your hair for you to become protected

Firstly, we're skipping between the Equality Act (civil law) and the Fraud Act (criminal law) in a way that doesn't work IMO. Secondly, losses under the Fraud Act must be in terms of money or property (see s6). i asked her specifically about the fraud act as I was able to use it here to report a man to the police who'd claimed to be a woman for personal gain (material gain) and he is being prosecuted under that criminal law and then civilly as well by myself

don't see how this would work. Amnesty can hire who they like for feminist events. They could have an all male panel who identify as male if they wanted. it was a paid position in the form that he was a woman speaking at a women's event, therefore taking a spot from a woman by claiming to be one.

Important disclaimer: I don't think the law in this area is very good. I am just explaining it. Please don't think that I endorse it.* anyone who reads your posts knows your view but thanks for the disclaimer so your post can't be spun to suit others agenda. Sorry for the superficial reply at the supermarket, in phone but wanted to answer asap as I feel this is an important issue and wanted to get some other views on it

AllyMcBeagle · 14/06/2018 17:37

So let the Trans lobby take us MN users to court then - for having hurt feelings online shockshock - that's the answer- let them take us on as a group - not MN.

Unfortunately, I think they would just sue MN for facilitating it.

Or we issue a class action against them for the harm they are causing us as a protected sex category for their aggressive silencing and trolling tactics on MN

Who are we suing? I don't think there is an identifiable group. And what are we suing them for? I don't think we have a cause of action.

Ardant · 14/06/2018 17:36

I think talking about legal routes is a bit silly isn't it? MN could ban us from using the words "Mumsnet" or "biscuits" if they were so inclined. They're a business after all.

Their brand is being attacked for being transphobic, there's only so long they can hold out.

womanformallyknownaswoman · 14/06/2018 17:31

So let the Trans lobby take us MN users to court then - for having hurt feelings online ShockShock - that's the answer- let them take us on as a group - not MN.

Or we issue a class action against them for the harm they are causing us as a protected sex category for their aggressive silencing and trolling tactics on MN

Fairenuff · 14/06/2018 17:30

If we thought it was difficult to express a gender critical position without these generic terms, we might hesitate - but honestly, we don't think it is.

Go on then. If it's so easy. You give us an acceptable term that doesn't use woman or female.

To reassure you, we've been discussing the collective nouns that posters use to describe trans people as a group; we're not preventing anyone from asserting that transwomen are born male

Eh? Didn't you just use a collective noun to describe transwomen as a group of men?

This is complicated.

< scratches head >

Are you sure you've thought this through HQ? Why not take a little longer so you can be clear. This might help >>> Gin

AllyMcBeagle · 14/06/2018 17:19

Self ID in the UK is not yet law. So to become a woman, it's not enough especially seeing as sex is a protected category. And it is neither illegal nor hate speech to use the correct (natal) pronouns to refer to non grc holding transppl.

I don't think this works unfortunately. Transwomen with GRCs have the protected characteristic of female sex for the purposes of the Equality Act and the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. Transwomen without GRCs have the protected characteristic of male sex and the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

Whilst transwomen without GRCs don't have the full legal rights that they would obtain if they got a GRC to be treated as women in most circumstances, the limited case law in this area is fairly clear that they do have some more limited rights because of their gender reassignment characteristic - eg there have been Employment Tribunal claims where transwomen without GRCs have been able to sue for discrimination where they have been 'misgendered'/referred to repeatedly as a man etc. These matters are all very fact-specific and there haven't been many at all in the higher courts but I can see why this is difficult for MN.

The Fraud Act 2006 makes it an offence to dishonestly make a false representation with the intention of making a gain or causing a loss. So anyone without a grc is under law committing fraud if they cause a loss to natal women, who are protected under the equality act.

Firstly, we're skipping between the Equality Act (civil law) and the Fraud Act (criminal law) in a way that doesn't work IMO. Secondly, losses under the Fraud Act must be in terms of money or property (see s6).

Especially ppl like [Madigan] who have taken the place of women's officer when not having the legal requisites, ie grc.

I don't know whether LM has a GRC or not, but it's an unpaid position as far as I'm aware and if anyone wanted to allege that there had been a breach of the Labour Party rules that would be best done in the civil courts first (like that case a couple of years ago where it was alleged that Labour had breached its rules by not letting new members, who would likely vote for Corbyn, vote in the leadership election).

Shon and amnesty who caused a loss to female feminists in asking him to speak for us etc.

I don't see how this would work. Amnesty can hire who they like for feminist events. They could have an all male panel who identify as male if they wanted.

I can't see CPS being interested in either of these examples and a private prosecution would fail IMO.

Important disclaimer: I don't think the law in this area is very good. I am just explaining it. Please don't think that I endorse it.

opemin123 · 14/06/2018 17:17

Read the Guardian article and it says "..Mumsnet moderators are now likely to delete potentially “hurtful” comments that use trans people’s former names, posts which use pronouns they have consciously rejected,"...and this.. "However, the proposed policy to also moderate terms such as cisgender [identifying with the gender one has at birth] show that the forums may not be set up to enable balanced discussion on gender identity.”

So, it seems that the trans community get to dictate what descriptives we can or cannot use.

Cisgender is a must-use yet stating a fact when calling a trans-woman "he" is not to be allowed.
Surely this decision to stop women from using the factual pronoun of "he" when addressing a male...will be overturned. Interested to hear others views for/against this. A man is a man is a man.

ProperLavs · 14/06/2018 17:17

quite trans women will always be male, they will be that way until the end of their lives. That is a fact, it is a truth.

Bowlofbabelfish · 14/06/2018 17:11

MPs are not the Law. They have opinions and a fair amount of clout, but no MP can impose actual sanctions on you. They vary in quality from excellent to utterly incompetent and they are as good, or venal as anyone else. A letter from your MP holds no real world power.

Good solid legal advice is what’s needed here.

Amalfimamma · 14/06/2018 17:10

@user1499173618

They are indeed. I've sent her links so she can have a look herself but she's said that this new stance is not in keeping with the Equality act

Dinosaurchicken · 14/06/2018 17:09

we're not preventing anyone from asserting that transwomen are born male

Trans women are male. They may wish they weren’t or wish they were different in some ways but they are.

ProperLavs · 14/06/2018 17:09

It's the same old crap as far as I can see, the same as it has been for many many centuries. Men telling women what to do, what to say, how to refer to themselves, how to define themselves. The only difference is that the men are now wearing dresses and lipstick. It's still the same old shit.
I will never agree to saying that a man is female. I will never do that because they are not. I am a woman but no man will ever be a woman no matter how much they stamp their stilettoed feet.

FortunateCookie · 14/06/2018 17:08

Excellent post woman 👏

ImagineBeing · 14/06/2018 17:08

To actively seek out a feminism board and then say its distressing you to the point of suicide so you must close it down is the same MO. The answer for such a person, who would surely be extremely fragile mentally, is not to have the board closed down, its to step away from the board. Why on earth are such people seeking out a small specialist section of a parenting board? Answer: to close it down.

There was suggestion yesterday, that instead of calling an ambulance a MP wrote to MN instead. I don't know if this is true. If it is true, why are people not calling ambulances when people say they are suicidal?

Bowlofbabelfish · 14/06/2018 17:05

we're not preventing anyone from asserting that transwomen are born male,

Good. How about the fact they remain Male?

I will also agree with other posters above on the subject of threatening suicide. Closing down debate with ‘you can’t say that or I’ll kill myself’ is classic abuser 101. To actively seek out a feminism board and then say its distressing you to the point of suicide so you must close it down is the same MO. The answer for such a person, who would surely be extremely fragile mentally, is not to have the board closed down, its to step away from the board. Why on earth are such people seeking out a small specialist section of a parenting board? Answer: to close it down.

You are being abused @MNHQ. This is classic, classic male abuse patterns. Please take some legal advice on this - I would bet folding money that your legal position is stronger than you think.

Dinosaurchicken · 14/06/2018 17:05

I’m still going with biology.

Trans person who identifies as a women or a biological male.

Depends on situation - eg if it is necessary to reference their sex. Which it may well be. Eg. Male violence. Trans people who identify as women are still male and should still be included in male violence statistics.

Or. Trans people who self ID as women are often subject to discrimination for being trans.

BeyondSceptical · 14/06/2018 17:04

Great post, woman

PermissionToSpeakSir · 14/06/2018 17:03

Hear hear woman

OP posts:
user1499173618 · 14/06/2018 17:02

Amalfimamma - your solicitor friend is therefore suggesting that MNHQ is legally on shaky ground here?

womanformallyknownaswoman · 14/06/2018 17:01

This is about capitulating to a very vocal activist group. It is disingenuous to put the emotional weight of someone else’s fragility onto women, many of whom will have dealt with this in their personal lives. Expecting gaslit women to lie for instance ? Shabby and cruel. This is primarily a website for women, and men who support them. To tell us we now have to consider the opinions of the opposite sex every time we post in the feminist section ? That is both bizarre and depressing.

Well said - I have continually raised the harm being done by skewed moderation guidelines to women who are survivors of male violence. And that is a significant minority or perhaps a majority of the users here, given the endemic rates of male violence. Being forced to call male-bodied people women, when it is obvious they are cross-dressing men, is sadistic.

And on top of that, some of them seem to take glee in causing distress to women, given their unrelenting verbal abuse on MN - for example the Twitter & misogynistic press comments they quote on here plus they never agree to disagree but continue to demand women succeed to their demands and derail discussions to reinforce their male entitlement. They don't start threads themselves preferring to derail feminist discussions.

Where I come from that's called bullying and those who enable it are bystander bullies. Women are protected by international law as a sex category - why is that ignored at the expense of a few vocal males?

All the research indicates this type of verbal abuse, derailing and silencing behaviour is from sadistic trolls, not genuine contributors. These trolls target women online. How many of the lobby group fall into the former category and how many are genuine? Miranda and many others tell us this lobby group is not representative of them.

Isn't it odd though that of all corners of the internet, they decide to come here? Not just onto Mumsnet, no, but the Feminism and Women's Rights board. Just that one tiny place. Where people discuss biological sex a lot because that is what feminism and women's rights is actually about?

Well said - it's no coincidence is it? So who exactly is getting off on trashing women's spaces and silencing them? The research says trolls. One could be forgiven for thinking some relish the harm they cause on MN. So what exactly is MN afraid of? Saying no to a lobby group that is unrepresentative and goes around silencing women aggressively?

At what point will you rise to the challenge MN, to make a stand for your women users on here? Exactly how much distress will you witness or will you continue to kowtow to bullies?

Why don't you say you will wait until the government consultation is completed and the law is clarified? And that until that point, will continue to provide a space for women to discuss this vital issue, in the spirit of freedom of speech and the safeguarding of women and children. Those who object have all the other platforms around the globe to use - which they do and have demonstrated they do. You pride yourself on providing one public space online to centre women and children's safeguarding concerns and allow those to be aired.

OnThisHill · 14/06/2018 16:56

I'm repeating this for @MNHQ

WHATEVER word(s) or acronym you come up with, after tying yourselves up in knots, handwringing and soul searching, in a VERY short space of time, TRAs will come at you with further cries of transphobia.
TiM was ALREADY a concession.
This is the Forth Bridge you're painting here.

Plus what Datun said at 14:34 (amongst others).

PermissionToSpeakSir · 14/06/2018 16:54

From my understanding we can still do that

Refer to male transsexuals/ trans identifying males as a subgroup of men?

Because thats what they materially are and that is all that is politically relevant.

OP posts:
Amalfimamma · 14/06/2018 16:52

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

LangCleg · 14/06/2018 16:49

Can't mention the sex of the class of people that are are the opposite sex from me in a discussion about my sex and why it matters that I am different from the class of people who are the opposite sex from me.

You couldn't make it up, could you?