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

I just had a comment removed from the ‘Tell Us Your Controversial Opinion’ thread…

90 replies

BlueEyedBogWitch · 30/06/2025 02:45

…for ‘breaking talk guidelines.’

The controversial opinion?

“Women don’t have penises. Ever.”

Apparently, that’s such a controversial opinion it breaks MN talk guidelines, despite the Supreme Court ruling.

What the fuck?

OP posts:
PepsiForEva · 30/06/2025 12:01

terracelane23 · 30/06/2025 11:49

You’re stating a biological fact. Women don’t have penises.

Indeed. Just imagine- it was not that long ago that if someone on MN posted 'Women don't have penises. Fact' the replies would be mostly a head tilt and 'You okay, hun?'

What an extraordinary world we live in that this is now controversial and people have been cancelled and lost livelihoods because of it.

terracelane23 · 30/06/2025 11:49

You’re stating a biological fact. Women don’t have penises.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 30/06/2025 11:44

Thanks MNHQ for apologising and reinstating the comment.
This board has been relentlessly targeted by some very intense men furious at being forced to comply with the law and I'm sure they've taken up endless hours of mod time moaning about what women say on here.

hholiday · 30/06/2025 11:38

agree! How many are we up to now?

lcakethereforeIam · 30/06/2025 11:08

Just added my agree. I'm wondering why it was removed though.

BundleBoogie · 30/06/2025 11:07

FlirtsWithRhinos · 30/06/2025 11:00

It occurred to me this morning that the very prolific posters who spend more energy starting threads than replying to them may be trying to get a load of aggressively transphobic or misleading thread titles on the Active or FWR screen so they can screenshot as "proof" of MN being a <checks notes> "transphobic hate site" that they can then leverage with ISPs, Cloudflare, regulators etc. Maybe even try to invoke the Online Harms act to stop women talking to other women about being women in ways that are not available to men 😡.

I'm wondering about suggesting MN includes the thread starter's username in the thread list. Would be a bit clunky but removes one way for bad faith posters to create problems for MN as a whole.

Show quote history

Yes, we should never underestimate the determination and deviousness of these TRAs.

ErrolTheDragon · 30/06/2025 11:06

It’s controversial to the same extent as evolution. Glad MNHQ has corrected and apologised for the error in a timely manner.

IfYouPutASausageInItItsNotAViennetta · 30/06/2025 11:06

Glad it got sorted, but how strange that it was removed in the first place.

A number of posters on that thread said pretty much the same thing - were they all accidentally removed as well?

True, it shouldn't be an 'opinion' - any more than the 'opinion' that grass is green; but an awful lot of people seem to hold the contrary 'opinion'.

AccidentalPrawnYouFool · 30/06/2025 11:02

It’s not even controversial anymore! Maybe that’s why 🤣

anyolddinosaur · 30/06/2025 11:00

Just logged in to find your post and add to the agrees - although it's fact, not an opinion.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 30/06/2025 11:00

NameChangedOfc · 30/06/2025 10:32

Maybe they considered you were wrong in saying it is an opinion, because it is an irrefutable fact? 😏

(Seriously, though, MN is full of blue fringe crazies lately: I've never seen so many TRA threads before).

It occurred to me this morning that the very prolific posters who spend more energy starting threads than replying to them may be trying to get a load of aggressively transphobic or misleading thread titles on the Active or FWR screen so they can screenshot as "proof" of MN being a <checks notes> "transphobic hate site" that they can then leverage with ISPs, Cloudflare, regulators etc. Maybe even try to invoke the Online Harms act to stop women talking to other women about being women in ways that are not available to men 😡.

I'm wondering about suggesting MN includes the thread starter's username in the thread list. Would be a bit clunky but removes one way for bad faith posters to create problems for MN as a whole.

NameChangedOfc · 30/06/2025 10:32

Maybe they considered you were wrong in saying it is an opinion, because it is an irrefutable fact? 😏

(Seriously, though, MN is full of blue fringe crazies lately: I've never seen so many TRA threads before).

BundleBoogie · 30/06/2025 10:28

Great news that it’s been reinstated OP. I hope they haven’t got any TRA interns for the holidays!

Original poster
BlueEyedBogWitch · 30/06/2025 10:26

Thank you for reinstating my post, MNHQ.

OP posts:
OuterSpaceCadet · 30/06/2025 10:21

99.9% of TRAs also know that women don't have penises so it's not really about that. It's about a drive to change the meaning of the word woman so that women no longer have a word for the class of human that they are.

I'm really relieved that @MNHQ are no longer allowing themselves to be coerced into joining in with this uber patriarchal bullshit.

BettyBooper · 30/06/2025 10:21

MarieDeGournay · 30/06/2025 09:52

That's good, MNHQ, it'd be worth investigating whether it was just an error, or if a moderator seriously considered it unacceptable, because they need to have a bit of a re-think. But I'm happy for that to be internal to HQ, I'm not looking for 'heads to roll' or anything, mistakes happen, and this may just have been a mistake.

Also agree.

Thanks for sorting it MNHQ.

PauliString · 30/06/2025 10:21

And there I was wondering whether it was deleted because it's not controversial enough for the thread!

RedToothBrush · 30/06/2025 10:18

Ah I see I should have read until the end of the thread.

RedToothBrush · 30/06/2025 10:17

Have you appealed to MN and asked why your post has been deleted?

ArabellaScott · 30/06/2025 10:11

Glad we've established that we can say

Women don't have penises. Ever.

PepsiForEva · 30/06/2025 09:59

agree also

LittleBitofBread · 30/06/2025 09:58

MarieDeGournay · 30/06/2025 09:52

That's good, MNHQ, it'd be worth investigating whether it was just an error, or if a moderator seriously considered it unacceptable, because they need to have a bit of a re-think. But I'm happy for that to be internal to HQ, I'm not looking for 'heads to roll' or anything, mistakes happen, and this may just have been a mistake.

Agree with this.

MarieDeGournay · 30/06/2025 09:52

That's good, MNHQ, it'd be worth investigating whether it was just an error, or if a moderator seriously considered it unacceptable, because they need to have a bit of a re-think. But I'm happy for that to be internal to HQ, I'm not looking for 'heads to roll' or anything, mistakes happen, and this may just have been a mistake.

MNHQ
PipMumsnet · 30/06/2025 09:46

Hello @BlueEyedBogWitch
Sorry about that, your post has just been reinstated. It should not have been removed and we apologise.
MNHQ

Millers5star · 30/06/2025 08:44

Another new intern?
The last one leaked people's personal information.