Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Oh look, it's those guidelines making no sense whatsoever again!

691 replies

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 04/11/2019 17:09

So, I got an email about a comment in which I said that I wanted to know why genderists keep comparing trans identified males to black women and lesbians being deleted. I think this is absolutely barmy, and have said so to HQ. I'm also baffled as to how this breaks any guidelines and thought perhaps it was time for us as a group to revisit the guidelines and explain once more to MNHQ why they're not working.

What's actually happening here is the the obsessive trans activists who monitor this site are attempting to pick off posters one by one. We lost Orchid last week, and she was just the most recent of many. I'm not sure in MNHQ realize that's happening and welcome it or if it's somehow escaped their notice, but it's a pretty messed up thing for them to be allowing to happen to their users, in my opinion. Are they going to allow this to continue until the only commenters left in this forum are the TRAs who want the entire site shut down?

I know the people who despise the women here would very much like this to all happen under the radar, and that's exactly why I'm not allowing it to play out that way.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
Original poster
TheProdigalKittensReturn · 04/11/2019 19:04

Since apparently HQ are "taking a look" at the thread, I will summarize my point.

A. We should be allowed to refer to male people as male. "Trans identified male" is about the most neutral way one could choose to describe the people to whom it applies - it's not goady, it's just a way to let other people know which group of people you're talking about without being compelled to call them women.

B. You can't seriously think that everyone who comments here is going to read through each rule before making every comment to ensure that they aren't inadvertently breaking one? That's an unreasonable burden to place on users. Most of us are already self censoring to a significant degree in the attempt to stay onside - nobody can do that consistently at all times, especially given that the rules are clear as mud and contadict themselves

C. You are allowing people who are not even users to pick your most prominent users off one by one in an attempt to shut down debate. This really does not square with your public commitment to allowing debate to happen, and is also a terrible thing for any forum to allow.

D. Why are users not being told which part of a deleted comment was the issue? A vague "well this broke guidelines somehow" is not civil or helpful if your goal is to have the person avoid doing the same in future.

E. Refusing to state the specific problem would however make sense if your goal was to have users walking on eggshells at all times out of fear that something they say may be used to punish them. Is that your goal? If not, why are you treating users that way?

OP posts:
Original poster
TheProdigalKittensReturn · 04/11/2019 18:57

Ah, so the monitors have noticed the thread and think it's an excellent opportunity to get me and others banned.

Still not pretending to agree with you!

OP posts:
StopThePlanet · 04/11/2019 18:56

ErrolTheDragon

More good advice! I have to remember the time difference - I think I posted that thread in the evening for me which is late for the UK. I'm having lunch now and bet you are mostly all having/had dinner at this point.

As Errol said, please excuse the aside. Flowers

ErrolTheDragon · 04/11/2019 18:55

Just got this:
'Hi all, sorry for the mass mail,

Thank you for all your reports about that thread - we're looking now.

Best wishes,
MNHQ'

Well... I hope the rest of the 'mass' is you lot....!

ErrolTheDragon · 04/11/2019 18:53

And perhaps it's the difference between what feels general and and what feels personal.

Mostly it is, but rather explicitly in the section of clarification re 'tim' it's general.

Original poster
TheProdigalKittensReturn · 04/11/2019 18:52

It's never even occurred to me to go pester TRAs on one of their forums because why would you do that? It takes a certain type of personality disorder to make that seem like a reasonable use of one's time, imo.

OP posts:
AnyOldPrion · 04/11/2019 18:50

And perhaps it's the difference between what feels general and and what feels personal.

Yup. I had used the phrase “male transitioners” on and off for a while with no problems. Then recently a post containing those words was removed. Turned out it was because I used them to describe a specific person, rather than as a general comment. The mod I asked was very polite.

The thing that struck me afterwards is that the trolls trawling the site for posts to take down know the rules and guidelines down to a T. Way better than many of us using the forum regularly know them.

And I thought to myself, that even though I spend a good deal of time discussing these issues, at least I’m not sad and pathetic enough to waste huge chunks of my life reading thousands of posts on a forum I despise in order to bully women discussing their rights.

BernardBlacksWineIceLolly · 04/11/2019 18:49

further, we know that no record is made by the system when staff read PMs, so they can read them consequence free

ErrolTheDragon · 04/11/2019 18:47

StopThePlanet (hope no one minds the side-discussion, I was probably one of the few people who saw her deleted thread) - I'd suggest if you start another thread you don't do so in the evening. It's when trolls and troll hunters are active and experienced mods generally aren't. And the other thing is to somehow avoid advertising the wretched film to lowlifes iyswim.

Original poster
TheProdigalKittensReturn · 04/11/2019 18:47

Be careful not to put anything personal in DMs! As a result of Emmagate we know that any mod can read them, and at this point I'd be reluctant to assume that anything meant as private would be guaranteed to remain that way.

OP posts:
FleetsumNJetsum · 04/11/2019 18:43

me too, last week

OhHolyJesus · 04/11/2019 18:39

Have DM'd you Kittens I got a strike for the same phrase a while ago. I think it also spells a name I'm guessing is triggering...

Datun · 04/11/2019 18:37

They've painted themselves into a corner, for sure. But whilst they're in that corner, they have to make a decision, using some sort of criteria. I'm assuming.

And perhaps it's the difference between what feels general and and what feels personal.

For example, the difference between the connotations of the word man and male. Even though, they both derive from exactly the same thing.

Tim, or Trans identified man/male, they have decided is upsetting to trans people. So it can't be used.

Male born individual (say) is not such a catchall term, and is very much biology based. Of course, it's all exactly the same. But it's about them being able to make a decision.

Of course, we absolutely have to be able to acknowledge that transwomen are male. And they know that.

And although I wish it was otherwise, personally, I think it's worth giving HQ as much ammo as possible for them to deal with the spiteful targeting.

It's certainly a motivation for me, to be able to get across what the fuck I want, whilst knowing the guidelines are intact.

StopThePlanet · 04/11/2019 18:36

ErrolTheDragon

Thanks for the advice! I do think it's important to forewarn people what is in the beginning of the film. I never read a synopsis prior to watching a film and rarely watch trailers (they give the best parts, sometimes the end away) but this is the first time that I have been met with something like this.

If I have some time this week I will write a new thread - it's just going to take a lot of thinking of how to put it together (again with even more word play) so FWR can talk about it without it getting flagged as being nefarious.

Original poster
TheProdigalKittensReturn · 04/11/2019 18:35

It's also interesting that when they're going to tell us something that's clearly outrageous, like that we're being punished for describing male people as male, the little note saying so tends to come from a generic "MNHQ" rather than a named person.

OP posts:
OhHolyJesus · 04/11/2019 18:33

I've had a warning for that same phrase before (not saying it again now as I'm not clear of my 6 weeks yet) and I'm not taking the risk!

Original poster
TheProdigalKittensReturn · 04/11/2019 18:32

I have to say, I am indeed feeling pretty bloody alienated right now! Even more so after reading Stop's story.

OP posts:
BernardBlacksWineIceLolly · 04/11/2019 18:32

They also need to start explaining precisely what they're objecting to in comments they delete rather than a waffly "this breaks guidelines" with no explanation as to why

we can but dream...

I've been asking MNHQ to explain a recent deletion of mine They've stopped replying to my emails (interesting for a site that sets such store by civility in its users) so I guess I'll never know exactly what the problem is.

I have a creeping suspicion that it's because they don't know what the problem with the post was either. it's just that someone said jump and they said 'how high?'

testing987654321 · 04/11/2019 18:31

This reply has been deleted

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

Carriemac · 04/11/2019 18:31

Dear MNHQ,

Please remember that only women give birth - and that 'Mums' specifically refers to women.

Whilst the site has grown to include all sorts of other things, it would be a massive own goal to alienate your core readership - which is women.

Sincerely,
An adult human female.

Original poster
TheProdigalKittensReturn · 04/11/2019 18:29

I'm still a bit confused as to who M&S think is going to buy anything other than their food if they drive all the mums away.

OP posts:
zebrasdontwearbras · 04/11/2019 18:27

Well M&S won't like what they read here, will they? But kow-towing to TRAs won't improve their profits - which I understand are in a bit of trouble at the moment.

I've noticed that Justine comes out with very brave statements in the press - about agreeing with freedom of speech, and the right of parents to discuss concerns about giving young children puberty blockers etc etc - but this bravery of Justine isn't actually translated into the moderation decisions. Some of the mod decisions have been very over-zealous recently - Orchid's being a particular example.

HQ's decision to let that thread stand - with a child - well, a minor certainly - a 16yr old posting on here pretending to be their parent - would not be allowed in any other circumstances on this forum. It is literally trolling - pretending to be someone you are not is against the guidelines as far as I knew.

Ridiculous that a) those threads both remain, and b) that orchid's banning was upheld.

BeMoreMagdalen · 04/11/2019 18:27

Errol, when I am feeling sanguine, I take that pragmatic line, yes. But today I am having one of my intemperate 'why are we grateful for scraps while being coercively controlled?' moments. It will pass. I may be banned before it does, but, you know, genie out of the bottle now, and actually, MN isn't the only place we can discuss this now, thanks to some extremely brave lesbians breaking away from Stonewall, and some tenacious feminists pressing damned hard against closed doors until they open, the conversation is breaking out all over.
In light of that, the 'guidelines' begin to look much less benign, if they ever did.

Original poster
TheProdigalKittensReturn · 04/11/2019 18:24

Why should Stop have to walk on eggshells like that though, just because this is the feminist board? Why is everyone else allowed to basically say what they like but the feminists have to be very very careful and remember to watch your tone young lady? This should be the space where women speak most freely.

OP posts:
ErrolTheDragon · 04/11/2019 18:21

That isn't my position, though. They are born and remain male.

Well, yes, and afaik we're also allowed to state simple biological truth that mammals can't change sex.