MNHQ now email posters with how to "get around" the talk guidelines.

[GoshAnneGorilla]

There is yet another thread on FWR about trans people. Like nearly every other thread on there about trans people, it's a load of transphobia dressed up as gender analysis.

Nothing new, sadly.

What is new, is that MNHQ have now sent an email to a poster whose post was deleted, telling them how their post could be within the guidelines, even including a copy of their original post to make editing all the easier. This is because "discussion is important".

So, a few questions for MNHQ.

Are GLBT rights at all important to you?

Will you be extending this " How to bend the talk guidelines" services to racist, homophobic, or disabilist posts too, or is it only trans people who deserve to be discussed in a manner which is extremely offensive?

Cote I've been reading these trans threads for about 18 months and as far as I recall, Kim never answers these questions. It's a total waste of time and energy to thoughtfully answer Kim's questions and expect any engagement or thoughtful response to anything you might say. It may be worthwhile for lurkers or for discussion with other posters but don't expect any meaningful follow up from Kim. It's always the same questions and if you ask any questions, the response is always "I've answered this before / I don't want to make it about me".

I don't think it is fair to ask Kim to be a voice for transpeople. Obviously if Kim wishes to do so that is Kim's business but I think if we should quiz anyone on what they define as transphobic it should really be the OP.

This is Site Stuff. The thread is about how MNHQ will set the limits of what is considered transphobic on MN.

You quoted F-Word's guidelines on transphobia as saying "Any assertion that trans women are not “real" women". And I'm questioning it, because it doesn't seem reasonable to me.

That is what I have been trying to explore with these questions:

• Are transsexuals female (biologically - female of the human species)?

• If not, can a person who is not female be called a woman?

• And if not, can it be transphobic to say "transwomen are not 'real' women"?

To me, the answer to all of the above is "No".

I take it the changing rooms comment was aimed at me, because I was the one who said something along those lines in the FWR thread. I don't really feel like I should have to justify myself for how I feel, but I will, as I am really angry at being compared to a neo-Nazi, homophobic or other general fucking bigot.

I do not, in any way, hate, despise or have particularly negative feelings about Trans*women at all. Just wanted to get that one out of the way.

What I have had is a life whereby people with penises have abused, hurt, harmed, raped and assaulted me. I am not unlike a lot of women in that respect.

I have also lived in Germany, where mixed changing rooms are the norm, you expect to see people with penises wandering about naked, and, because I know they will be there, I can make an informed choice about where I wish to change, how I wish to do it etc.

In the UK, it is not the norm to have mixed changing rooms, generally, changing rooms are segregated into male and female spaces.

I would feel very uncomfortable with someone with a penis being in a female changing area if I didn't expect them to be there. I feel uncomfortable to the point of needing to escape if there are unexpected penises around me.

I am not alone in this. There was a whole twitter storm where women who have been sexually assaulted, raped or otherwise harmed by people with penises stated that they were uncomfortable with unexpected penises and were labelled as TERFs and some even more disgusting slurs. They were threatened with rape, being burned to death, their children being burned to death, they were vilified and slagged off. One woman's husband was asked what he was going to do about his wife!

I am not sorry that my fear, my life, my experiences and those of far too many other women makes us bigots. I stated clearly that I knew that the changing room issue was unfair and that I didn't know how to get round it, maybe by following the German way of doing things?

Why is it though, that born men aren't being told that they are Nazis and bigots? Why are born men getting away with perpetrating violence toward Trans people and born women are getting all the shit of it? Why are gay born men not being hounded off their spaces if they say they aren't interested in sleeping with pre-op Transmen or even post op Trans*men? Why is it that, yet again, born women are being silenced and vilified for merely exploring ideas to do with THEIR experiences?

I don't envy MNHQ, but if they create an atmosphere similar to the rest of the internet world where these things aren't allowed to be discussed because Trans*men and their allies say they can't, then what will that say about MN?

Sorry, probably not terribly coherent, mostly due to anger and upset.

Another thread has been started in chat

It's not fair to expect kim to be the Voice of Trans. Equally, the characterisation of previous discussions on the effect of trans politics on feminism (which is the general thrust of all of them) as bigotted is unfair.

I must admit that MN being the only site of which I know that is actually willing to tackle this at an HQ level to be more than a bit mind boggling. How it is not a raging debate all over the internet is beyond me. I don't mean the definition of woman stuff (although I think that is an entirely valid discussion, intimately tied up with what I am about to say and is long overdue), but the effect of the allegations of transphobia on the depth and breadth of feminist discourse, the ability to consciousness raise among women born and raised as women and the subsequent activism (or lack of it) around issues that are fundamental liberating women from the opression that arises because of their sex.

Why would someone who has never had an unwanted pregnancy, not ever be at risk of being in that situation, be excercised about abortion rights, for example? That person may theoreticaly sympathise and might perhaps march alongside, or sign a petition. But where does the passion for action come from? And how DARE anyone who will never be in that position shut down discourse because they insist that MtF are women too? It's the ultimate in not ignoring the troll. I know that accusations are levelled at FWR because the unwary or the new get accused of making anti-feminist statements and that people are put off posting because of it. How likely is it that feminists at the start of their journey are going to put their toe into the water on feminist sites like the F Word? If anyone can point me in the direction of sites where this doesn't apply, then I would be very grateful.

I am angry at the trans activists. I am more angry with the feminists who have capitualted to them, though. I don't know what definition of feminism they use, but it sure ain't the same as mine. There's no route to engage with them, though. Not without a whole heap of crap raining down and who needs that? I don't envy MNHQ on their deliberations - crap or capitulation seem to be the only 2 options here. Let's hope they find a 3rd.

You're welcome Kim. I would really appreciate it though if you didn't compare feminist analysis of gender and therefore transgenderism to homophobia.

As I said before this isn't a knee jerk response to the unknown or about delicate sensibilities.

I think transsexualism has been colonized and hijacked in similar ways to lesbian and gay rights (and intersex). I'm not transsexual but the people I know who are, are dismayed and outraged by so much of the trans movement. They want no part of it and I increasingly hear "not in my name".

So if a transwoman is in prison, is it fair for her to be sent to a women's prison?

Is it fair for her cellmate to share her cell with someone who has a penis? Remember 1 in 4 women are victims of rape.

Whose right trumps whose?

For me, as a feminist I will always put the rights of women first.

The rights of which woman would you put first in your example?

The one who is a woman.

TiggyD in the case of incarceration I wouldn't put anyone "first".

Women are in female prisons because we know that they are vulnerable to male violence if they are incarcerated with men. In particular sexual violence.

Transwomen are also targets for male violence if they are incarcerated with men (as are other populations including homosexual men, young men, men with disabilities, men with mental health issues, non violent men, etc).

I don't see this as a problem for women to absorb but as a problem for men to be honest about and address.

I would put the rigjts of the woman first, not the transwoman.

How likely is it that feminists at the start of their journey are going to put their toe into the water on feminist sites like the F Word?

This is me. I read this thread (and later the others) as it came up in Active threads this morning. I can't emphasis enough how glad I am that I read about the issues here on MN. Since reading more I've been lurching between anger and sadness.

I find it interesting that quite a few posters on the thread in chat don't see why we actually need guidelines specific to this one issue/population.

I would tend to agree with them.

Most of the websites I know of who have guidelines on transphobia do so because they have a policy on transgenderism and indeed gender. And the reason they have a policy is either because they are sites which are concerned with sexual politics (such as lesbian and gay rights) or because they are feminist sites and they only accept certain views and positions about gender politics.

MN is neither of these. MN is a parenting website. And because it is a parenting website that is dominated by women we discuss women's issues and MN has created a specific board on which to discuss some of the more political aspects of being a woman. MNHQ has said many many times that FWR is a section about feminism and that it is not a 'feminist board' as such (it is not a feminist safe space, etc because that is not how MN is moderated). So why would MN have a specific policy on transgenderism and or gender politics?

IMO the very existence of guidelines specific to transgender issues/transphobia on a website is a policy statement in and of itself. Particularly if no other group is given special specific guidelines. MNers are a vast and varied population and surely we should all be treated the same - if we are to have guidelines specific to transphobia then why not for racism, lesbophobia, homophobia, sexism, disablism, etc?

We have recurring threads on MN where muslim MNers have to put up with ignorance (and racism) about their faith and ethnicity. We have recurring threads where parents of children with special needs have to put up with offensive and ignorant posts about people with special needs. Same for lesbian MNers having to read crass/thoughtless/ignorant posts about sexual orientation and of course black and mixed race MNers having to put up with casual and not so casual racism. There is also plenty of sexism and a fair bit of ageism on MN.

Why don't any of these (and numerous other) groups deserve their own guidelines?

We have guidelines which ask us to "use the same courtesy when posting messages on Talk as you would use when speaking to someone face to face" - I think that one sentence covers a lot of ground. Most MNers are here for support, a laugh, the interesting discussions, etc and we don't have a desire to be unpleasant or offensive (even if things get heated sometimes or people post ignorantly sometimes). And we have a 'report post' button for any unpleasantness or offensive posts, plus MNHQ is pretty good at keeping an eye on repeat offenders and telling them to cut it out if they want to avoid a banning.

This whole thread began because I got reported. MNHQ told me why I was reported and I imagine if I post in the same vein again I will get knuckle rapped. If I keep doing it I will cross over into goady fucker territory and no doubt will be heading gradually for a banning. So I won't post what got me deleted again. Job done. And, as has already been specified by HQ on this thread, this is also how they handle reports about other issues such as racism, homophobia, etc. Seems like a good system to me and I don't see why one group need extra special care over and above that provided for any of the other groups which suffer from discrimination and the ignorance of others in this world of ours.

You can get personally attacked/flamed on MN for just about anything including where you park, where your cat shits, how many meals you get out of a chicken and how often you wash your towels.

I know none of those are as serious as being attacked for something about your actual person or your children.

And then there are the attacks about a person's stability or mental and emotional health in order to discredit their opinions. Or calling comparing people to Nazis because you disagree with them.

I think it is an inevitable part of a forum as big as this one. I get called all manner of things due to my opinions on vaccination and feminism. The doghouse has a reputation for being controversial (they were lovely to me when I posted there though). I guess I'm lucky because personal attacks on the internet mostly don't bother me, I don't take them seriously even if I take the subject under discussion seriously. I might feel very differently though if I was a lesbian, woman of colour, parent of a child with special needs, had a disability, etc.

Rowan said that they regularly delete posts that are transphobic.

I am wondering whether the real issue is whether anyone reports them in the first place?
If they are never reported because everuone else thinks someone else has, then the posts get to stay. And mumsnet get the bad reputation for it when it isnt them at all.

Hey everyone - just to let you know, we've posted about transphobia over in site stuff - hop over and let us know your thoughts.

thanks
MNHQ

Thanks for the update.

Now the dust has settled a bit I would just like to say that I'm glad there seems to have been a positive outcome out of all this because there has been a lot of very interesting and searching discussion had on important issues. Which is great and I'm glad that discussion happened.

On a less positive note I would also like to say that I find the offensively accusatory scapegoating of FWR regulars, including myself, that took place on this thread, a disgrace.

Interestingly one of the things I originally got deleted for was something that many posters brought up on the chat threads. I'm not saying that MNHQ was wrong to delete me but whoever reported my post in the first place might want to reflect on that.

Well I find the general tenor of the trans threads a disgrace, so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

As for your post, if it broke talk guidelines, then it broke talk guidelines, whether 1, 20, or 200 posters agreed with it.

By reflect, do you mean not to report any future posts for transphobia, because lots of posters have the same views as you anyway?

I'm sure there are posts deleted for racism, even though quite a few on MN may agree with their contents, does that mean people should "reflect" and not report those posts either?