English Blackball Pool Federation

My assumption too.

It's very telling isn't it? Men claiming to be women are taking women's sponsorship, places, medals and awards when they're allowed to take over women's sport. Not to mention their sometimes successful attempts to decriminalise voyeurism and indecent exposure by wedging themselves in to women's changing rooms, showers etc as seen in the Darlington and Fife cases.

The time for pretending is over. A democratic society depends on truth and free speech - not threats and fantasy luxury beliefs.

@CoralMumsnet

Please could you confirm whether Mumsnet HQ are going to allow us to repeat, accurately, what is said openly in court, and will likely be repeated all over in the mainstream press and social media.

If you are policing our speech, please let us know on what grounds, and on whose demands - individual or organisation.

Thank you.

I am also shocked that an entire thread was deleted for “misgendering” when the sex of the individuals under discussion is entirely pertinent to the case!

The fact it was deleted makes me suspect that MNHQ was threatened with litigation for allowing the thread to stand - could @CoralMumsnet confirm this? Again, it’s impossible to know how we can discuss a court case where the sex of the individual is the basis of the case, without noting that sex.

Are all of the Sandie Peggie threads going to be deleted too? And the fencing ones? It would be useful to know what prompted this shift

Shameless lurker who doesn't contribute often but shocked to see that Mumsnet is going against current guidance being used in courts and forcing ppl to compel speech to the point of wrongly sexing someone.

More info on how Mumsnet have come to this decision to promote gender over sex would be useful @CoralMumsnet

Say it loud and proud NecessaryScene, Mmmnotsure, PrettyDamnCosmic and Apollo441.

Mumsnet you seriously need to re-think your stance on this.

Which is exactly what has been argued in the courts and accepted by judges. It's impossible to be accurate about the legal proceedings when we are being made to uphold falsehoods.

@CoralMumsnet
How can we quote what is said in court without misgendering?

It's kind of tricky to discuss this case without "misgendering" as the compelled use of wrong sex pronouns hides the whole reason that the case has come to court in the first place.

The courts have specifically said you cannot be forced to use wrong sex pronouns. Did they say 'except on Mumsnet'? This compelling of women's speech by the people who specifically monitor this site is direct harressment against GC beliefs. Shame on you for going along with it.

GC views are WORIADS so a protected characteristic. It is harassment & direct discrimination against those holding GC views for MNHQ to delete posts that call out cocks in frocks as men. As per the tribunals GC people cannot be forced to use incorrect pronouns when referring to men dressed as women.

Thanks Necessary. Remarkable that it needs to be said.

Woman are now (!) being allowed to refer to men who identify as women as 'men' and 'males' in actual court and tribunal proceedings. Their speech is not being compelled.

Why can we not do that in this sex and gender section, already hived away on the Mnet site, on the only major social media network that is overwhelmingly populated by women, and on a specific section that is concerned with this topic? No one is @ing the people concerned. They need to come looking for us.

it's so sad that an organisation of that size & limited means is having to lawyer up in order to defend the way that it draws the lines between its sporting categories, which are really no different from age groups, boxing weight classes, belt colours in martial arts, etc etc etc.

the TRA's would of course agree to a degree that such struggles are disproportionate and unnecessary, but only on the proviso that they get their own way, unconditionally.

so here we are.

What @NecessaryScene said.

I can see that some people believe that "misgendering" is bad, even harmful.

What's not clear is why that belief is taken more seriously than those of us who think "missexing" is bad, even harmful.

A man calling himself a woman, or indeed anyone calling a man a woman, is mindbogglingly offensive to women. Even before the material impacts.

The whole reason for this case is people going along with calling men women.

Maybe you might want to be cautious about an ongoing case - in which case you need to be symmetric and take the same view on calling an individual a man or a woman.

To allow calling someone a woman, but not allow calling them a man is taking a side on the case.

The courts themselves seem to have figured that out in recent guidance - that they need to not stop those in the case on either side from using their own terms.

Coral, I thought Mumsnet allowed us to call males men now? Including transwomen? Genuine question. It used to cause deletions, but I thought Mumsnet had stopped that now?

One side has RMW while the other has a KC.

I wonder how this will play out ...

Yes. With zero insight that this might be an inappropriate act if I recall accurately.