Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

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

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

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
AlfonsoTheMango · 10/06/2021 16:08

@DelilahDingleberry

Confused by the slightly defensive replies to my comment. I wasn’t implying anyone hadn’t read it.
The replies aren't defensive. However, your post was patronising.
Alternista · 10/06/2021 16:04

@AnneLovesGilbert

It’s the actual law. So would be good for MN moderation to reflect it.
This, please.
FlowerArranger · 10/06/2021 16:01

Absolutely - totally agree with OP!!

CuriousaboutSamphire · 10/06/2021 15:58

@soniamumsnet

Hi - just dropping in to say we'll discuss this in the virtual MN office. Flowers
Thank you
Igmum · 10/06/2021 15:41

Yes yes yes please!

Mulsteadly · 10/06/2021 15:40

Just adding my support too - thanks for starting this thread OP

Voice0fReason · 10/06/2021 15:35

Yes absolutely.
I'm not looking to insult anyone, but I do want to be able to talk openly about scientific facts.
Both this judgement and the clarification from the EHRC that sex is a protected characteristic.
I also think it is relevant that in the ruling in this case, not all transpeople are covered by the gender reassignment protected characteristic.

Beamur · 10/06/2021 15:29

Glad to hear it will be discussed. It's a really helpful precedent to have been set and should make it easier to discuss this issue without posters having to use extremely convoluted speech to make a point. Respectful discourse as ever should be maintained

WhereYouLeftIt · 10/06/2021 15:28

Yes, I really would like if the 'guidelines' could be reviewed.

Mytholmroyd · 10/06/2021 15:25

Yes I support a review of this please!

NotTheFunKindOfFeminist · 10/06/2021 15:24

Yes please Mn! Smile

NotTheFunKindOfFeminist · 10/06/2021 15:24

Yes please Mn! Smile

Fallingirl · 10/06/2021 15:22

@Datun

Yes it's just been established that gender critical feminism and believing that sex is real is not transphobic.

It's now a protected belief.

Hopefully, it will give HQ some leverage with their advertisers. They cannot be compelled by their detractors to flout equality law.

Indeed. Flouting equality law would be a bad idea.

As I understand it, it is perfectly legal to say you believe any given trans woman to be male, and refer to them in the third person as “he”, but setting out to directly harass that individual is still illegal, same as it would be to harass anyone else.

Albgo · 10/06/2021 15:19

Agree with OP.

AthelstaneTheUnready · 10/06/2021 15:02

Agree with you, OP.

Whybot · 10/06/2021 14:55

Agree OP

DelilahDingleberry · 10/06/2021 14:54

Confused by the slightly defensive replies to my comment. I wasn’t implying anyone hadn’t read it.

Magenta82 · 10/06/2021 14:52

Yes please, it is a legitimate belief and we should be able to express it

Oblomov21 · 10/06/2021 14:50

I have read the full judgement. As have many.

Oblomov21 · 10/06/2021 14:48

Agreed.

BonjourMinou · 10/06/2021 14:48

Yes please!

Bowednotbroken · 10/06/2021 14:42

Yes please! The current rules are restrictive and confusing - and seemingly inconsistently applied which doesn't help.

2020isnotbehaving · 10/06/2021 14:38

@DelilahDingleberry

The High Court judge also said “ This judgment does not mean that those with gender-critical beliefs can 'mis-gender' trans persons with impunity.”

Sounds like reading the full judgement will be worthwhile.

I only meant a one off innocent mistake is still treated like you set out to be a abuser left right and centre every day. It felt very much like you can never make a mistake. You can never get confused in normal life. If you get me. Partly why I rarely post on these issues. Unless you are 100% on top of everything and correct words this week likely get into trouble.
Wrongsideofhistorymyarse · 10/06/2021 14:37

Thank you MNHQ.

Original poster
ViperAtTheGatesOfDawn · 10/06/2021 14:36

@DelilahDingleberry

The High Court judge also said “ This judgment does not mean that those with gender-critical beliefs can 'mis-gender' trans persons with impunity.”

Sounds like reading the full judgement will be worthwhile.

I have read the full judgment.

As have many.

I don't think anyone on this thread has expressed a desire to correctly sex (aka 'misgender') individuals 'with impunity'.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread