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?

Please don't all fall into the trap of only seeing and responding to the posts that trigger a reaction. That's dull forum behaviour.

See, Gosh, I would love to read your explanation of trans not being a belief. Not goading, I really would. I can't understand if no-one lays out their explanation. Links would do.

I never suggested it was Goth Anne.

But genderism is a belief system that I am not required to believe in. I can still respect a trans person's lived experience and identity.

I suspect the reason you will not engage on the thread is because you would rather argue against straw men.

I have been on many trans threads before, as I have already stated. I have no interest in discussing trans issues on your thread, just I wouldn't discuss race issues on Stormfront.

I feel MNHQ's moderation of this thread is hypocritical. Hence I have started a thread, in Site Stuff to discuss this issue.

oh god TERF

stop engaging with the weirdos

I said before - set a trap, pop back to provoke them and talk about it on a new thread called the New Lakeland catalogue"

I'm more interested in women's issues, actually. But I would be interested in learning about trans issues on a trans thread, from all invested parties. And women born and rased as female are just as invested as you are, for the reasons laid out in the numerous threads.

A chat thread would only serve to frustrate your search for validation, kim. So, knowing you are on here, I wouldn't do such a thing.

aggie and kim?
OMG

GothAnne, that is your choice, but I think you should stop attributing beliefs to me on this thread that I have never claimed to hold.

Why hypocritical? I am certain as I can be that MRAs (or their ilk) have been advised how to post prevously. That would explain their longevity, at least.

Touche!

But is your lived experience more important that mine? Isn't that the crux?

A trans person, contributing to a thread about trans people is spamming?

As opposed to all the uber valuable contributions from people who have only encountered trans people on the internet?

So no trans people are allowed on threads about trans people, unless they behave in a way that non trans people approve of?

Do you hear yourselves? Do you realise how ridiculous you sound?

Again, nobody said the things you are claiming they said, Gosh Anne.

I think the best way to have a debate about trans issues is in a feminist section so 50 ardent trans-deniers can crowd round the one or two trans people and tell them they're just mentally ill blokes in frocks.

It's precisely these Orwellian attempts at silencing and demands of doublethinking sex and gender that alerted me to the existence of transactivism. Although transgenderism conflicted with my feminism I believed it to be a benign entity that wasn't a big issue for women. The constant attacks on women for Naming the Problem are what revitalised my radicalism.

I keep seeing more and more women having radical epiphanies due to transactivism so these attempts as silencing are doing our work for us.

TiggyD, again, that did not happen.

No GoshAnneGorilla. If the thread was "what is your experience of being trans" then it wouldn't be spamming, but when we're trying to talk about how transactavists are silencing feminists and eroding women's rights then a moderate trans person turning up and saying "but what about me?" on every thread feels like not only spamming but also silencing.

Querying the moderation on a website is not Orwellian.

Almond - Crotch maven did accuse Kim of spamming the thread.

I also think TiggyD's description is spot on, actually.

I would love to read a counter to "being a woman is not a feeling" or "a woman is not a man who doesn't want to be so" or "women born and raised as female should be able to discuss the issue pertaining to that in feminist spaces without interefernce from those without the same lived experience". Really, would love to understand the counter argument. Because the opposite is what is posited and is being accepted on virtually all feminist spaces. It's completely bizarre to me that feminism has reached this point and I would like to understand the reasoning behind it. Genuinely.

However, back to the OP. I am certain as I can be that MRAs (or their ilk) have been advised how to post prevously. That would explain their longevity, at least.

I rather think the argument on the thread is that children who do not conform to strict sex roles are being medicalised and treated as if they were mentally ill when they should be left to explore their personalities.