Mumsnet moderation of trans rights and gender critical issues II

A man cannot be a woman, and a woman cannot be a man. Because it impossible.

Why are we having to put up with this bollocks?

"Gib until you get your head around the difference between sex and gender, and around the meaning of “sex”, you’re not going to make any sense, even in defending a TRA position (which is presumably your intent)."

There isn't a difference in either the Gender Recognition Act or Equality Act as I read them. That's what I believe we have to go by

Baldly saying - typo sorry

*to carry on misgendering and mis-sexing trans people.^

Gib until you get your head around the difference between sex and gender, and around the meaning of “sex”, you’re not going to make any sense, even in defending a TRA position (which is presumably your intent).

Surely, despite all this “transwomen are men” is still permissible to say?

My recorded objection to TIM was that it referred to trans women as male. I know others had the same objection. Unpacking it and badly saying transwomen are men is retrograde.

@thebewilderness

I imagine it will be for using the term 'transgender identified males'.

Here are the guidelines Justine posted today

www.mumsnet.com/info/trans-rights-moderation-policy

The term will now be like a red rag to a herd of bulls (biologically male bovines)

GC members are posting what they think is and is acceptable. I am only doing the same thing. You just don't like my views.

Wong again. It is your authoritarianism I despise.

Gibb, are you objecting to 'misgendering', or 'missexing' or both?

Would you say there's a difference between the two?

I've asked multiple times when in the transition process a person's sex changes and what the mechanism is by which the change happens. Still no answer.

Surely, despite all this “transwomen are men” is still permissible to say?

I'll never refer to a male as any sort of female, girl or woman. It's the slippery slope we already slid way too far down.

Exactly PTSS- this my my Poland as well. Look how well appeasement of the aggressor worked in WW2 or when Mao started thought policing what was the truth and what wasn't

"I wonder how long the actual mods will put up with GibbertyFlibbert posing as a mod on all the threads."

GC members are posting what they think is and is acceptable. I am only doing the same thing. You just don't like my views.

Why on earth would "male trans person" be a problem with regards to MN rules?

My take is that if applied to a woman (eg a trans woman) it is transphobic and clearly against the spirit of the policy. Justine said biology could be discussed. She didn't say that it was OK to engage in sophistry to claim a biological content (which isn't even stated) to carry on misgendering and mis-sexing trans people. That's obviously against the policy in my view.

Coercive control starts and ends with policing a woman's sense of autonomy and being. When behaviour changes are forced because they don't confirm to the dominators rules, what happens next is thinking and feeling distortions follow. This is the mind control that takes away a woman's sense and self and sees her trapped in abusive relationships because her being is being controlled, drop by drop, by another.

I will not be party to harming women. @MNHQ I have highlighted before how your moderation and thought policing, by not allowing woman to say what they see without sanction, causes real harm, especially to those who have already been victimised through male violence.

Irrespective of how you rationalise your actions, what you are now doing is harming woman. That is totally unacceptable and illegal.

Why on earth would "male trans person" be a problem with regards to MN rules?

Because Gibb doesn't like it and believes that the rules ought to reflect their preferences.

I've said this a million times - there is a group of trans activists that will not accept any distinction being made between the group of people who were born with a uterus and the group of people who wish they had been. Any concession made in an attempt to spare their feelings will immediately be followed by demands to move the line further in their preferred direction and place further restrictions on the words that women are allowed to use. This pattern has played itself out multiple times, and I'm baffled as to why MNHQ haven't realized yet that it's going to keep happening.

I wonder how long the actual mods will put up with GibbertyFlibbert posing as a mod on all the threads.

GibbertyFlibbert.

Why on earth would "male trans person" be a problem with regards to MN rules?

Any objective truthful person can see that it is a biologically and scientifically accurate way to talk about those persons known colloquially as "transwomen".

I really see no issue. It is a politically neutral, inoffensive and scientifically valid observation.

So why don't those of us who believe that our spaces and identity and sex are under attack also organise and bombard those who advertise here.

At this point? That may be exactly what needs to happen.

I understand I have had a lot of comments deleted today. I do not know why. I usually use the terms transgender identified males or transgender advocates to describe the lobbyists here and elsewhere.
I rarely use acronyms because I struggle with them myself so I have sympathy for lurkers who are suddenly expected to understand that an acronym means something entirely different from what they always thought it meant.

Worried about losing adds due to people who have changed which gender they identify with (I can't be bothered to work out what term I must use so will have to hope this is ok, it is factually true) So why don't those of us who believe that our spaces and identity and sex are under attack also organise and bombard those who advertise here. Why are we always the silent ones? Are our voices worth less than the minority who declare a change in gender identity? Why are people dictating terms and how we may speak? Any term or word can be deemed offensive. As long as terms are factually correct then any attempt to force people to stop using them is an attack on freedom of speech.

A few 'work arounds' although irritating will not halt the debate. And the more people who oppose the gender critical viewpoint, the quicker the trans ideology is exposed.

posted by @Datun earlier today. I agree with her.

Sod it, I'm just going to say it right here.

Transwomen are men.

Bring on the first deletion.

I'm a recent name changer but I have been here for years under various nicknames. I'm not really sure what I think of all this tbh. I'm actually currently debating between simply deleting my account or posting three posts which break these new guidelines so they will be deleted and I will have my account suspended.