Page 9 | How to discuss BBC 100 women list?

BernardBlackMissesLangCleg · 2021-12-07T07:53:48+00:00

Hello I've seen two threads attempting to discuss this list deleted today. Could you possibly give guidance about how the feminist issue of men taking the place of women in a list of women can be discussed on the feminism board without the thread being deleted?

Franca123 · 07/12/2021 10:11

This reply has been deleted

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

ArabellaScott · 07/12/2021 10:09

We can say 'transwoman', presumably? No?

ArabellaScott · 07/12/2021 10:08

I didn't see the threads and I am struggling: 'if users habitually use a collective term which defines them by an aspect of their identity that they have explicitly rejected, so we’ll usually delete collective terms for trans people which centre on natal sex'

I'm sorry, I'm struggling.

What is this term or terms? Could you point me towards it, I don't want to break rules but it's hard to know what they are if we can't use certain words but don't even know what they are. I'm being sincere here, I have no wish to offend anyone but I need clear definitions.

Shedmistress · 07/12/2021 09:45

So if we can't mention [redacted] then we should I guess refer to the BBC's 97 women list?

But then we'd be accused of erasing the [redacted]?

What a web we weave...

Original poster

BernardBlackMissesLangCleg · 07/12/2021 09:41

I’ve always been very puzzled by the requirement that women mind their language to make sure men feel welcome on a feminism board

Feels a bit…..sexist, no?

Mired in the expectation that ‘ladies’ are ‘nice’

OP posts:

purpleboy · 07/12/2021 09:34

If we wish to have this discussion then what are we allowed to say? What can the title be?
I didn't see previous thread so have no idea if I will break talk guidelines.

MNHQ

MichaelMumsnet · 07/12/2021 09:33

@AnkleDeep

I eagerly anticipate the civil debate rule to apply across the site.

I suggest HQ begins by looking at posts aimed at stepmothers. Which are often very uncivil and verging on abusive.

Or does this rule only apply when discussing trans issues? Clarity on this would be appreciated.

Our rules on civil debate apply across the site. Here's a link to the Talk guidelines. As always, if you think a post or poster is breaking the guidelines then please report. We're always fine to take a look.

MNHQ

MichaelMumsnet · 07/12/2021 09:31

@MangoBiscuit Yes, we look at the use of this type of term in context - but if someone is being goady/uncivil then we'd delete.

@TheOccupier Our guidelines have been in place since June 2018. We're convinced that it's possible to host discussions around sex and gender within the terms of civil debate.

AnkleDeep · 07/12/2021 09:29

I eagerly anticipate the civil debate rule to apply across the site.

I suggest HQ begins by looking at posts aimed at stepmothers. Which are often very uncivil and verging on abusive.

Or does this rule only apply when discussing trans issues? Clarity on this would be appreciated.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 07/12/2021 09:24

@MichaelMumsnet I didn't see the title, but obviously the entire point is that many women on the feminist board don't agree that biological males should be on a list of women. They need to be able to use the scientific, correct sex terms.

TheOccupier · 07/12/2021 09:21

@MichaelMumsnet

Hi all, we took a couple of threads down earlier - one for breaking talk guidelines and the other because it was a thread about a deleted thread.

Regarding the modding of the first thread - it was the title that broke guidelines. It's mentioned in the deletion message:
'We've taken this thread down because the title doesn't meet the standards of civil debate outlined in our Talk guidelines'.

Here's the relevant section:
We don’t wish to prevent anyone from asserting as part of their gender critical position that transwomen are born male, and as ever, there is room for mods to exercise their individual judgment. But we think trans people will feel unwelcome if users habitually use a collective term which defines them by an aspect of their identity that they have explicitly rejected, so we’ll usually delete collective terms for trans people which centre on natal sex.

What a mealy-mouthed response. I don't give a shit if a small group of offence-seekers "feel unwelcome". As a gender-critical radfem I am constantly made to feel unwelcome in both online and offline spaces. I'm a grown-up, so I deal with it. Who does Mumsnet think its audience is anyway?

MNHQ

MichaelMumsnet · 07/12/2021 09:14

[quote Cuck00soup]@MichaelMumsnet when these situations arise, could you contact the OP and adjust the thread title perhaps?

Or it looks like a valid conversation is being prevented. [/quote]
Sure, that's also an option.

MNHQ

MichaelMumsnet · 07/12/2021 09:13

@IntemperateSpirits we'd use this section of the guidelines:

We'll continue to make decisions on a case-by-case basis, taking tone and context into account. We'd be unlikely to delete if it's said in the context of a civil discussion of biology.

If it’s used on principle rather than to express a specific point, we’d likely delete it on the basis that it undermines civil debate^.

EMotion · 07/12/2021 09:11

So we can say that transwomen are born male, it we can’t say transwomen are men?

Wow.

Cuck00soup · 07/12/2021 09:09

@MichaelMumsnet when these situations arise, could you contact the OP and adjust the thread title perhaps?

Or it looks like a valid conversation is being prevented.

IntemperateSpirits · 07/12/2021 09:02

if users habitually use a collective term which defines them by an aspect of their identity that they have explicitly rejected, so we’ll usually delete collective terms for trans people which centre on natal sex

So we can't say transwomen are men? Is that what it boils down to? Because We don’t wish to prevent anyone from asserting as part of their gender critical position that transwomen are born male means we can say it ... but then you say we can't. We can say it, but only in a certain secret-squirrel way? Help me out here.

MangoBiscuit · 07/12/2021 08:52

"... people will feel unwelcome if users habitually use a collective term which defines them by an aspect of their identity that they have explicitly rejected..."

So you will be taking down all threads where users repeatedly use the term cis to describe people who aren't, and who continue when asked not to?

MNHQ

MichaelMumsnet · 07/12/2021 08:45

Hi all, we took a couple of threads down earlier - one for breaking talk guidelines and the other because it was a thread about a deleted thread.

Regarding the modding of the first thread - it was the title that broke guidelines. It's mentioned in the deletion message:
'We've taken this thread down because the title doesn't meet the standards of civil debate outlined in our Talk guidelines'.

Here's the relevant section:
We don’t wish to prevent anyone from asserting as part of their gender critical position that transwomen are born male, and as ever, there is room for mods to exercise their individual judgment. But we think trans people will feel unwelcome if users habitually use a collective term which defines them by an aspect of their identity that they have explicitly rejected, so we’ll usually delete collective terms for trans people which centre on natal sex.

Helleofabore · 07/12/2021 08:41

Let’s hope the third thread is the trick.

IHateCoronavirus · 07/12/2021 08:40

Following both threads with interest

Shedmistress · 07/12/2021 08:33

You can talk about the women as much as you like.

Just don't mention the [redacted].

Fullyhuman · 07/12/2021 08:29

I’d like to know too

MamDancer · 07/12/2021 08:28

@BaronessBomburst

I think we should discuss the list of 100 trans people and wonder why there are 98 women on it....... Fancy all those women invading trans spaces!

Outrageous!

TheOccupier · 07/12/2021 08:26

Thanks for starting this thread @BernardBlackMissesLangCleg - I'd like to know too.

Original poster

BernardBlackMissesLangCleg · 07/12/2021 08:24

you do wonder what goes through the minds of the people who report the threads and the MNHQ staff who delete them

'I've silenced some women talking about the default pull to always talk about men and never talk exclusively about women, go me'?

'I've silenced some people who don't share my beliefs, go me'?

The world is full of nutcases, so I'm pretty 'meh' about them reporting those threads

MNHQ actually taking those reports seriously is a different matter though. they present themselves as a serious company

OP posts: