Anon. members - Forums open to court action??

[justasking111]

Was quite shocked to see this. Will this be a test case? Mumsnet is such a tame well run site compared to the comments I see in the online press. Is the writing on the wall for free (cough) speech or is it a culling of trolling. Personally I think that something needs to be done, some folk have no filter or are just plain nasty.

news.yahoo.com/transgender-activist-wins-court-ruling-forcing-parenting-website-reveal-identity-alleged-online-abuser-121317596.html

Speaking of court type things... I have just read on Caro's twitter that 'someone' has contacted her to say that they are sorry (don't call the police) and won't do it again (please don't call the police), was not really responsible because of their fragile mental health (god, no please don't call the police) and would urge others to stop the harassment (NO POLICE! PLEEEESE).

I'm sure it was a heartfelt apology motivated by genuine remorse, not fear of having their details splashed across the front page of the Daily Mail and having a visit from a real police person (and possible criminal record).

So called 'hate' speech does not include hateful comments towards biological women as far as I know. I can't think why that might be.

Can someone show me the transphobic posts on this thread

They never ever say what transphobia is. They just say it's there and if you can't see it you're transphobic.

Which makes me think they're 100% full of shit and know it

Tiscold and others seem to think a crime has definitely been committed and that there has been hate speech:

Also the comments posted are criminal and have been so extreme for a judge to say that what was said constitutes a crime. So they're not cracking down on free speech, they're cracking down on crime.

That's not what's happened. For a start, the potential court case under discussion has nothing to do with the police, "hate speech" or transphobia.

Stephanie Hayden claims a MN user left defamatory comments about her personally. She told the court she needs the user’s personal information in order to pursue private legal action against them for defamation of character.

Stephanie has been granted that information. MNHQ didn't oppose the request, which indicates that the user didn't oppose it either.

However, having received the information, Stephanie Hayden still has to bring a successful case for defamation of character against the user. And there is room for doubt as to whether such an action would be successful.

There are transphobic comments on this very thread

Where?!

to the posters saying they have never read any transphobic messages on here that is presumably because they are themselves transphobic.

It's not because they're transphobic at all; it's because when asked to cite specific transphobic comments those that claim MN is a hotbed of transphobia are unable to do so.

MN is by and large an evidence based forum. If you're going to claim MN is transphobic the show us the evidence that there are transphobic comments. Shit or get off the pot in other words.

Pretty sure the poster just mentioned Stephanie's former name didn't they?

Fun fact: these days, if you're a man who commits a horrible crime, you can just change your name and sex and then sue everyone who ever says that was you and say "deadnaming".

I'm not sure 'because I say so' is admissible in court.

So many morons so little time.

I genuinely dont understand what constitutes transphobic..
So if i say "You cannot change your biology however, if you wish to be addressed with female pronouns and present yourself as a female, I will respect that" am I transphobic? And if so, how?

Pretty sure the poster just mentioned Stephanie's former name didn't they?

That and mention of alleged former activities that may or may not have resulted in a now non existent criminal record.

Uh oh, the anti trans Borg are in full force. You can identify them by phrases such as:

"If you see any transphobia, report it and MNHQ will deal with it" (most trans threads are like Swiss cheese precisely for that reason so it's impossible to pull up a deleted post)

"But what is a woman?"

Which is all over the twittersphere. Some supplied by the person and their friend themselves. All very odd.

“The anti trans Borg” 😂😂😂😂😂

I think Stephanie has had a lot of Botox.

"But what is a woman?"

Which weirdly the answer of 'an adult human female' is too 'transphobic' to let stand.

Lol at fatberg.

The faux innocence and wilful blindness to transphobia is quite something.

Philosophical question:

If a transphobic post (or, as is happening more often now in the FWR board) a transphobic thread, is deleted, does it exist at all?

I think it does, in the minds of those who read it prior to its deletion, and particularly in the minds of those who posted in agreement or support.

Earlier this week there was a not especially unusual rash of whole-thread deletions for transphobic content in FWR.

Did the hundreds of posters who joined in on those threads and felt supported, encouraged and empowered in their views continue to feel those things after the deletion?

Probably, given the standard response of “well everything is transphobic now” the fact of being deleted doesn’t take away from the solidarity boost of hanging out with like minded people.

Incidentally, there is a lot of content on FWR that refers to now deleted things that were once posted online or said by other people. Often with screenshots. Often still being raised and re-posted months or years after the original posting has been deleted or the remark apologised for.

I think deleted transphobia is still transphobia, just as deleted misogyny is still misogyny. It doesn’t go away or not exist or not have been harmful or continue to be harmful just because it’s been deleted.

The faux innocence and wilful blindness to transphobia is quite something

What is transphobia in the first place?

If you are saying that Karen White is a woman, and that saying he is a man is transphobic, then I am guilty as charged.

If saying that the rapist Karen White is a man is not transphobic, then is saying SH the flying lawyer is a man, is that transphobic? Or not?

I mean, who gets to define who is and isn't allowed to say whether someone is or isn't a man or a woman?

As there is no such thing as a sex changes, and never has been, then what exactly is transphobia at all?

If you cannot define transphobia, you cannot claim it. So if you are claiming it, explain it.

As usual you don't get a straight answer 🙄

As usual we are way off topic again (rolls eyes)

Well, 'whole-thread deletions' often happens because a thread takes a turn where a vexatious lawyer may try to sink their teeth into it and it's just not worth the bother.

Just by saying that something it transphobic doesn't make it so. These days all it takes to get a twitter ban is to state biology, chemistry or archaeology - so science is transphobic?

I do wonder about people who will stand their ground on the right to denounce anyone (any woman) who says that they believe a man is a man, yet refuses to denounce targeted harassment and threats against such women.

I have yet to see a photo of a woman wearing a t-shirt saying 'kill the ...' with a suffragette colour painted baseball bat jauntily flung over one shoulder or wielding a knife, or see a website selling baseball bats (never cricket bats?) and axes, again painted in the suffragette colours, with clear implication that these are not tools or sports equipment but weapons to harass, if not hurt, actual real women.

I can't see any FWR threads that resemble Swiss cheese. Deleted posts yes, but how many - less than 1% I'm sure. Does less than 1% of posts make MN transphobic? 🤷‍♀️

Bigotry has consequences.

Oh dear did you mean to try to sound sinister there?