Return of women who were right about safeguarding

[RhannionKPSS]

AIBU to think Mumsnet should allow women ( & men ) who were right about lack of safeguarding in certain places back on this site? ( if they wish to return) ?

Err primark have announced that the women’s changing rooms are “for anyone who self identifies as a female”. So not single sex. Still unisex. But claiming they are single sex. Weaselly bastards.

The banned people are the tip of the iceberg really. MN have made it so difficult to actually say what one means on the FWR board and stay within the ‘guidelines’ that threads can be difficult to follow, difficult and (particularly for novices to the board) intimidating to write.

It hasn’t been the same board since MN chose to split it. clever tactics really to cut traffic to that area of the site.
I am aware the MN has had to cope with a lot of pressure due to the interest FWR gets, but I know many in real life that only stay here for FWR, and pick up other topics of interest at random. So this may not be such a clever move on their part.

People who know their onions about safeguarding are critical to have around and must be listened to. I learned so much from LangCleg before she was booted.

Now we see the biggest national charity dedicated to trans issues hit by a series of scandals, all of which show zero understanding of safeguarding.

1. massive data breach
2. suing another charity for existing and not agreeing with them (not such a good look now)
3. really dodgy chat rooms, giving children medical advice they are not qualified to give and then pointing them towards internet cess pits like discord
4. a peadophile adjacent trustee that they neglected to make public on their website. And i wont even mention what CEO did to their child.

You can agree or disagree with the women of FWR, but if you don't see that gender questioning children deserve and NEED better than this, then you are part of the problem. And women like LangCleg are needed to help shine much needed sunlight on these organisations who hide behind their celebrity endorsements.

Oh, and if you think mermaids is a shit show, just take a look at what the scottish government is up to, and how they are defining conversion therapy.

Sorry, rambled on, of course the banned posters should be asked to return, I doubt they will (be asked, or say yes).
if it sways anyone, I will offer to eat the unmentionable hot breakfast concoction weekly.
do do Lang Lang Lang
do do Lang Lang

YANBU - The whole ideology is more like a cult, it’s frightening and those that question or challenge any aspect are cancelled. MumsNet is a site for women so why on earth has the feminism board been renamed to remove the word ‘Women’… because of a tiny minority of men that feel offended.
I’m pleased to see the tide turning and these stories picking up traction through the mainstream media.

WELCOME them back with an apology, more like. And I hope they do decide to come back, and bring a bit of fresh air with them.

No, unsurprisingly and sadly they haven't.

They released an ambiguous statement and when asked for clarification refused to plainly state that the women's changing room would be for the cunty type only.

Now they've released something that states 'all women' and we know what, that means.

This has been happening in Primark for some time and there was a freshly reported case yesterday of a man barging in on a woman in the Primark changing room.

Mumsnet got scared like many companies and decided best to support those who shout loudest the men….

I doubt they would want to come back Mn screwed up big time. Silencing women for their fears on a site mostly for women on a topic of womens rights.

Not that you can still talk about it much without being shouted at and called names. No #bekind to women or children just the men and their supporters on these issues.

And there's still so much we could all be banned for saying straight out. Nothing hateful, just facts and safeguarding and women's rights.

Yes but MN did what they did deliberately and I don’t think they want them back. They absolutely killed the FWR section for sure, that’s why when I got an email just now from MN about a heated airer discount thing after being on the thread about them, I won’t click on the link to help MN out.

Also just for posters who didn’t know, the feminism board was split in two after sustained lobbying from certain posters who insisted that discussions around women’s rights in the context of transgender issues was putting them and oh soooo many other ppl off posting there. FWR was then split in 2 - one was named sex & gender and the other feminist chat. Funnily enough the posters who did the lobbying are now barely seen anywhere near feminism chat but they got what they wanted
History here

Fair enough.
It seemed like a quick response to the largely ignored issue of women’s rights being publicly eroded!

I’ll go back and look at that source to see what it says.

I don’t shop there (along with M&S, Monsoon etc) but it’s still good to know that even I wanted to, I would not, on principle.

My bloody list gets longer weekly.

Wish I could join, but I'm not on Twitter 🙁

Nope, this still explains fuck all.

(I can infer it’s about trans issues because this is mumsnet, but I’m not sure why the coyness to just say it.)

Fuckers!

Another example of abuse of women's rights to safety in today's papers.
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3cef0ad0-442a-11ed-abc9-d0d53e948d21?shareToken=9eb3928d1a3ee3198488f2ccf31f1f19

Talking about safeguarding of women, especially the most vulnerable , in the above case female prisoners, should be front and centre on a woman's forum.

You could easily work out what this is largely about of you read all the posts here.

It’s really not hard at all.

I just can’t believe they allow this.
Cant read it for the paywall, but has
Joanne Cherry provided comment at all?

Joanna excuse my error

SleeplessInEngland

women who understood and discussed safeguarding concerns surrounding sex self ID and around certain ‘charities’ policies and campaigning. What is it you’re not getting?? If you weren’t there don’t worry yourself about it

YANBU
I'd love to see them back. I learnt so much from the likes of Lang when I first joined.

It’s terrible that Mumsnet have put the feelings of men top of their agenda. I know that some people are grateful that mumsnet allow any discussion but I really don’t think that’s good enough. Sometimes, trying to comment on the FWR boards can be almost impossible after trying to couch it in terms that will be allowed. Well done Mumsnet for putting men first, slow handclap for standing against the rights of women and children.

This is essentially what LangCleg was banned. She directly communicated with MN that the policing of women's language in this way was a form of coercive control. When she wouldn't back down, they banned her.

This was before the Forstater case that confirmed in law that being gender critical beliefs are worthy of respect in a democratic society, and protected as a belief under the Equality Act. And before the cases brought by a number of brave women against the Tavistock Gender Clinic - which of course is now to be shut down because it is not fit for purpose.

LangCleg was always ahead of the game. Sadly, MN, whilst providing one of the few spaces in the early days of gender criticism to discuss the matter, have not always been brave enough to be seen as in any way as en par with the likes of Maya Forstater or organisations like Safe Schools Alliance. MN has always bowed to pressure. The breaking of the FWR board being the nadir of cowardice.

Against all evidence to the contrary, a group of posters claimed they were put off from posting on FWR because there was too much talk about gender politics. Despite there being a number of threads about all topics concerning women/feminism, not just gender politics. No amount of logic would appease them. Nobody can stop anybody starting a thread on any topic or discussing what they want to discuss. Oh no, they said, then you won't post on my thread, and that's not fair, you'd rather post about gender. But, don't you think that's a sign that you cannot separate feminism from the gender politics trampling all over women's hard won rights and boundaries. Oh no, they said, we can't possibly be exposed to you banging on about genitals all the time, it puts us off from starting threads about all the good feminist stuff that is not effected whatsoever by sex and gender. Blah, blah, blah. So they got their way and the board was severed in 2. They got "Feminist Chat", we got "Feminism Sex and Gender" or the naughty corner, where any thread started anywhere else on MN about the incursions of TRAs on women and children's safety and dignity is shoved in the hope it will disappear into obscurity.

And Feminist Chat? Well, the biggest gobs who got FWR separated didn't come back to start all their lovely gender free threads. Half of what is on there are threads about sex and gender. The place is virtual tumbleweeds. The schism was a complete waste of a once flourishing community of women sharing knowledge, strength and support in the face of the biggest threat to women's rights in 100 years. The people who clamoured for it - who will be reading this thread - should feel thoroughly ashamed of themselves.

Mumsnet is one of the few places where the rights of women to single sex places can be discussed at all and they have faced a lot of opposition because of their stance. It isn't really fair to say that they put men first, however, they should not be isolating topics about women's safety onto niche boards as it is every woman's concern.

MN have always run scared of its advertisers.