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

Any chance of a review of the FWR moderation rules in light of Maya Forstater's success in court please?

915 replies

ViperAtTheGatesOfDawn · 10/06/2021 13:02

The belief that transwomen are men and that transmen are women has been accepted as a legitimate and protected belief, yet we are not able to state this on Mumsnet under the current rules.

It has become increasingly difficult to discuss feminist issues on the dedicated feminism boards as a result of the moderation rules.

In light of Maya's success in court, and that 'gender critical' beliefs are considered protected under the Equality Act, would it be possible for the FWR sex/gender mod rules to be re-visited please?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
PronounssheRa · 11/06/2021 12:20

So we’d like to introduce a separate topic for Sex and Gender issues

This is odd, where should we post threads when there is a feminist issue around sex and gender?

CardinalLolzy · 11/06/2021 12:20

And conversely, if threads about sex and gender have implications for feminist issues such as maternity wards, refuges etc - can they remain in the main FWR board?
It seems you're trying to separate things that are intrinsically linked.

OvaHere · 11/06/2021 12:18

So we asked for the moderation rules to be reviewed in light of Maya's win and what you've come back with is further punishment for women in the form of eviction.

CardinalLolzy · 11/06/2021 12:18

So MN, how would you ensure threads that aren't ostensibly about gender don't have any posts questioning how feminine/ masculine the people under discussion have (eg when referring to "women in refuges ") or whether they are biologically male or female?
Would this not be a way for trouble-makers to ensure that any thread about women or feminism is shunted off to the sub-board - by asking derailing questions about "what do you mean by "women"?" or similar?

Vanishun · 11/06/2021 12:17

@TinselAngel

This feels like we're being punished for Maya's judgement rather than it giving us any benefit here.
This. What an odd move to say "we think you lot are transphobic and we're putting you in a new section".

Probably not the best timing.

MarshaBradyo · 11/06/2021 12:16

Feels a bizarre decision

Could you rethink the moving into new topic?

Thelnebriati · 11/06/2021 12:14

You only look at posts if they've been reported (and by people who don't even use Mumsnet), and yet you still say specific posters aren't being targeted for deletion.
Those two statements contradict each other.

Poster A) posts without sanction and poster B) writes the same type of post and gets their account suspended.

There are antagonistic anti feminist posters who have more than 4 deletions in a 4 week period, and who are allowed to keep their accounts.

TinselAngel · 11/06/2021 12:14

This feels like we're being punished for Maya's judgement rather than it giving us any benefit here.

OvaHere · 11/06/2021 12:12

Sex and Gender is a Feminist issue. We should be able to discuss it under the heading Feminism, it doesn't require a different section.

What you seem to be saying here is that we are the wrong kind of feminists and need to be shunted to a different section.

Thelnebriati · 11/06/2021 12:10

I know some of you will be disappointed that we insist on respectful language and inclusivity Shock

Thats another slap in the face.

SunnyintheSun · 11/06/2021 12:07

Eh? As a feminist I’m interested in ALL feminist issues, not just the sex/gender debate. Why would you separate them out? And how would that work for what is such a central issue to many other topics?

MarshaBradyo · 11/06/2021 12:06

The things you list are not what we want to be able to say anyway. We don’t want to spend time deliberately misgendering people. We merely want to state biological reality in general, not make it personal.
(I say we, others may differ)

I do want to stay in FWR though as this is crucial part of feminism to me.

TinselAngel · 11/06/2021 12:02

So we're being put in a special section away from Feminism?

JustineMumsnet · 11/06/2021 11:55

Hey,

Thanks for all your thoughts on this. We’re delighted with yesterday’s judgement because it vindicates the position we’ve held at Mumsnet for some time. Namely that people should be able to discuss sex-based rights and the implications of gender self-id freely, without harassment and that it’s not transphobic to do so.

This has not been an easy position for us to hold - we’ve been frequently labelled as a hate site by a few vocal activists on social media and in outlets such as Pink News and many of our advertisers have been targeted with such accusations, and subsequently withdrawn activity. So it’s a relief that, as of yesterday, our position is very clearly on the right side of the law.

That said, we believe it’s important, and in fact the only way forward where competing views and rights are directly in conflict, to be respectful of other opinions and beliefs - hence our insistence on civil debate and our keenness to be inclusive of diverse voices. There’s an important difference - hinted at in yesterday’s judgement - between stating a view in principle and stating it in an aggressive and offensive way - such as deliberately misgendering individuals or repeatedly trotting out ‘transwomen are men’. Threads devoted to named individuals to unpick their gender presentation, appearance, lifestyle or personal choices constitute a personal attack, so we will continue to delete them along with unfair generalisations. It’s this type of behaviour (as opposed to the view that sex is immutable) that we consider to be transphobic, and hence it is against our Talk guidelines.

Posting guidelines on Mumsnet have never simply been about a set of defined rules of what can and can’t be said: we always want to take context into account because this is as much about the kind of community we want, collectively, to create (one that is inclusive, supportive and thoughtful as well as incisive and bold) as about the semantics of what’s written.

We also think now might be the time to consider a reshuffle of the topics in the Feminism board. Feminism and feminist organising has always been a crucial part of Mumsnet and we want all Mumsnet users to feel they can use these boards to discuss the hundreds of ways in which sex - and gender roles - impact on women’s lives, irrespective of their views on sex and gender. So we’d like to introduce a separate topic for Sex and Gender issues and at the same time streamline some of the other topics under the FWR umbrella (some of which are rarely used).

I know some of you will be disappointed that we insist on respectful language and inclusivity here when elsewhere many gender critical feminists have had to put up with extraordinary amounts of incivility and indeed downright harassment. Please be assured that we will continue to insistently make the case for women’s right to be heard on this topic both on Mumsnet and off. But we do believe it’s far more effective to do that from a position of the moral high ground.

jellybeansforbreakfast · 11/06/2021 09:13

The guidelines are such that there's ways of skirting round getting deleted, but I have absolutely seen this for myself. You mean that the ways we phrase the truth of biological sex is so stilted and unatural that you could spot it from space?

Yes, we know. That's what we are asking MNHQ to reconsider!

AlfonsoTheMango · 11/06/2021 08:23

@Vanishun

I would appreciate this and also more clarity.

I don't post on these boards much anymore, partly because there seem to be unwritten rules that change all the time. As an autistic woman, the lack of logic is baffling to me.

It has a silencing effect (which is of course what the men's rights activists want).

Fellow autist here.

I agree. As there are no written rules, it is impossible to know what is and is not acceptable.

Vanishun · 11/06/2021 06:36

I would appreciate this and also more clarity.

I don't post on these boards much anymore, partly because there seem to be unwritten rules that change all the time. As an autistic woman, the lack of logic is baffling to me.

It has a silencing effect (which is of course what the men's rights activists want).

adviceseekingnamechanger · 11/06/2021 06:25

@Quaggars

People write that trans women are men and that trans men are women all the time on MN and they aren't deleted

We tie ourselves in knots not to do that. But feel free to post screenshots if you're so sure of yourself.

They absolutely do.
The guidelines are such that there's ways of skirting round getting deleted, but I have absolutely seen this for myself.
People do state that a lot on here.
I don't take screenshots though as I'm not that invested (or even technically minded lol)

Ah yes, the 'it happens all the time but I have no evidence' line. Not that your opinion matters, because that belief that no-one was allowed to openly say, is protected by law. At the risk of deletion, Transwomen are biologically male, and it's not transphobic to say so. It's just fact.
PearPickingPorky · 11/06/2021 04:08

I too would like to see the restrictions eased, and bans rescinded.

It is, at times, necessary to correctly-sex even a particular individual. The judgment today agreed that this can be perfectly legal to do, even when an individual takes offence.

Women (and it is almost-always women) should not be being banned from mumsnet for expressing scientifically accurate, and legally protected philosophical beliefs in the importance of sex over gender identity.

LangClegsInSpace · 11/06/2021 02:53

I have every faith in MNHQ's competence, Quaggars Smile

ViperAtTheGatesOfDawn · 11/06/2021 01:41

Can we not just get back to everyone having the same rules of PARD and no personal attacks?

Yes. That is what I would like to see.

It is fundamentally unfair that posters who believe in gender as identity are able to assert that men can become women, whilst posters who believe in gender as an oppressive hierarchy are unable to assert that men cannot become women.

Hopefully the judgement in Maya's case will help restore some balance.

OP posts:
Quaggars · 11/06/2021 01:41

@LangClegsInSpace

Yes, it would be good if bans could be reconsidered in light of this ruling.
Where does that end though? Some have been banned for being abusive (whether to moderators or other posters) Should they be let back too, as hey they're "GC"?
Quaggars · 11/06/2021 01:39

People write that trans women are men and that trans men are women all the time on MN and they aren't deleted

We tie ourselves in knots not to do that. But feel free to post screenshots if you're so sure of yourself.

They absolutely do.
The guidelines are such that there's ways of skirting round getting deleted, but I have absolutely seen this for myself.
People do state that a lot on here.
I don't take screenshots though as I'm not that invested (or even technically minded lol)

LangClegsInSpace · 11/06/2021 00:52

But also thank you for allowing these discussions when pretty much everywhere else was shutting them down Flowers I do appreciate it hasn't been easy. Hopefully this judgment will bring clarity and confidence.

LangClegsInSpace · 11/06/2021 00:48

More broadly, having a special set of extra rules that apply only to discussions around gender identity and sex looks discriminatory in itself, in light of today's ruling.

Can we not just get back to everyone having the same rules of PARD and no personal attacks?

Also it will be necessary to consider whether you are moderating posters who don't believe in gender identity to the same standards as everyone else. It would be good if you could confirm that posts such as 'bless', 'yawn' and 'Biscuit' will no longer be deleted just because of the subject matter of the thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread