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?

Err, did I?

My post got deleted - why? Are we not allowed opinions any more us CIS lot?

Transactivists are also fighting for equality and against hate crime. Why do people never seem to mention that?

GoshAnne, but the rest of the claims in your post were untrue.

Queen - you are not just talking about trans activists though, are you? There is plenty of discussion of "genderism" why people think trans people are wrong/deluded.

Describing a trans person's contributions to a thread about trans people as spamming and silencing is ludicrous. You don't like Kim's contributions, because you find it easier to interact with avatars of trans people someone's read elsewhere on the internet. You don't like a trans person responding to what you actually say.

I'm not fighting for equality. Maybe that's where it all falls apart. I'm all about equity. And women's liberation, of course :-)

Hello, Gosh? You seem to be reading my name, not my posts. (Apology accepted, because I'm sure you felt it, even if neither of us really experienced it)

If you want to discuss your OP, my response is: 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.

Perhaps the rest of your posts need to be on the thread you are complaning about. Then you can make it an actual debate, rather than making accusations about it being one-sided. Which it is, because you are posting on here. Unless you want to try for 2 one-sided debates, which seems odd.

So what's the issue?

You are using site stuff to spread a debate from another thread, making this a taat?

Because, it sounds like MNHQ are trying to listen to people and give them a chance to accurately redo their posts without personal attacks, and to allow threads to continue rather than been deleted simply as they no longer make sense with all the gaps.

So which is it?

To me the issue seems to be that there is a small minority of men who want to to be women. Fine with me - I have an uneducated opinion that if we never focussed so much on the gender thing it wouldn't even be an issue - but that now this small minority is trying to strangle feminist and women's views. And I get deleted for saying so.

Most 'feminist' websites now delete any gender-critical commentary. I've been deleted for saying 'Gender is socialisation, it is not innate'. Saying something so fundamental to feminism attracts rape threats, death threats and 'I know where your children go to school' threats. This is what is so Orwellian. I've seen people be forced to apologise for saying FGM is a women's rights issue because 'men have vulvas too'. Subjective identity politics is silencing women from discussing the objective material reality of their lives.

Critiquing genderism does not suggest that trans people 'wrong' or 'deluded.' Not all trans people believe in genderism, just as not all women believe in radical feminism.

Right so none of this really has to do with MNHQ, poor buggers.

I'll be off then.

Is there anyone here who doesn't long for the day gender is abolished and, if so, why?

No GoshAnneGorilla, I don't like the fact that Kim won't actually discuss anything while trying to take over the thread. Myself and others have tried to reassure Kim that we're not talking about trans women like her but she doesn't listen and she refuses to admit to things like the fact that there are predatory men out there who pretend they're trans to get into women's spaces or that quite a large percentage of trans women have working penises and want to use them to penetrate lesbians. The fact that she cannot even conceive that this might be the case should let her know that we're not talking about her or people like her so popping up on every TERF thread just feels like she's trying to stifle discussion for no good reason.

I'm well aware that transactivists are campaigning against hate crime. Unfortunately they are directing this campaigning against feminists rather than the violent misogynistic and homophobic men that kill them. It's also the MRA argument - more men than women are victims of violence and this is somehow the fault of feminists.

HoneyDragon - Actually, I do have an issue if MNHQ are handholding people as to how they can vent their prejudices and stay within talk guidelines.

Hence I started a thread in site stuff to query this, because I want to know when else this is happening and if they are doing this for posters with racist, disabilist, or other prejudiced views too.

Buffy - I started this thread to ask about MNHQ's moderation of a thread. I have said all I wish to on the TERF thread and I certainly did not throw around outraged insults in my comments there.

Kim and Tiggy you might not realise this but not every discussion between feminists needs to be framed as a "debate". We don't need MRAs or anti-feminists there to "help" us ensure that every discussion has the alternate view represented. We hear the alternate view all the time, every time we turn on the TV or radio or open a newspaper. This is one of the reasons why women like to meet sometimes without men. Feminists also engage in consciousness raising or just general discussion among ourselves. Not all voices are unified but we break away from default male constructs of "debate" where opposing views are given false equivalence. The constant demand to debate and include the "alternate" view that we hear every other place is draining and not constructive to feminist dialogue.

This is an open forum and anyone is able to contribute to any thread. On FWR, we are not allowed to exclude men, MRAs or handmaidens but we are allowed (largely) to discuss gender politics without being shut down, as is the case on most so-called feminist websites or general news sites like CiF. If you choose not to participate, our dialogue is no less valid. In fact, the most recent threads on trans issues have been measured and calm discussions of very controversial aspects of gender ideology.

But it's been rolled out across the ENTIRE forum. I had thought it completely a totally unnecessary measure. However, having read the other thread and this one, I can see why MNHQ are favouring it.

I feel for them, I really do. When the forum was conceived they certainly did not expect the site to become an space to discuss FWR. It's a huge site with many topics and variables. Many posters over the years have come to use the FWR boards exclusively rather than the site as a whole. Attracting a certain mindset of posters and consequently a certain mind set of troll. Often the trolls will also head into other spaces were there are posters who are emotionally damaged and vulnerable, rather than simply staying and antagonising FWR boards.

If you are to have a space to have debates and to discuss the rights, wrongs and intellectual theories behind ACTIVISM as well as feminist issues than I think some responsibility needs to be taken for the responses that are attracted. MNHQ have listened and listened, and tried to provide solutions to this.

The whole board is fed up with trolling. But let's face it FWR attracts more than it's fair share .... Sometimes ever other thread is populated by a nasty goady twats and trolls. The threads read appallingly, because the trolls get fed.

People complain they are stifled and the debate is lost when deletions occur.

So why can't MNHQ try something new to keep debates running? Why does it have to interpreted as something sinister or taking one side over the other in FWR. If it's through the entire site how the hell does it make MNHQ transphobic?

And don't any one dare to say I'm victim blaming. I'm certainly not ..... I just think MNHQ are been falsey maligned and used as a scapegoat for other motives.

honey I think you are saying the same as me. That if people are complaining about the lack of debate, they need to show what part they played in the debate. For me, as a relatively old person, trans issues in feminism are fairly new. I have been aware of, been sympathetic to and known trans people for many years but it has only been in the last year or so that I have come to realise how the typical trans narrative has an impact on women in general. It is an issue that is at the heart of trans and feminist thinking and for that reason I offer no apology for my views. I certainly welcome the chance to discuss these controversial issues in a calm and rationale manner.

I am very grateful to MNHQ for facilitating the discussions around TERF and to all those who have posted on the threads.

GoshAnne: it's a load of transphobia dressed up as gender analysis

Please could you explain how feminists can do gender analysis without being accused of transphobia? It doesn't seem to be possible any more.

'Please could you explain how feminists can do gender analysis without being accused of transphobia? It doesn't seem to be possible any more.'

You can't, because despite the po-mo at the base of their philosophy, genderists are effectively claiming the status of objective truth for their theories: gender is not about social construction, it is innate not coerced or conditioned, and 'identifying as woman' is the only acceptable understanding of the term 'woman'. Even though this conflicts with the dictionary definition 'adult human female', and with the experiences of women throughout the world, whose gender identification is completely irrelevant to their oppression.
If you point this out you lay yourself open to accusations of transphobia. If you dare to follow the argument to its next stage and suggest that according to some perfectly valid definitions of 'woman', transwomen may not actually be women, you will get it in the neck and run the risk of deletion.

HoneyDragon, I don't understand your above post at all. This is nothing to do with trolling. There are no trolls on the thread in question.

I'm the poster that GothAnneGorilla is talking about in her OP. I've been a regular on MN for about 8 years, I'm not a troll and none of my posts on the thread in question are goady/spammy/personal attacks/etc. I joined MN before FWR existed.

I thought for quite a while about whether I was going to bother posting on this thread or not, but out of respect and appreciation for MNHQ and Rowan in particular, I want to say some things.

First of all I shall give you my version of what happened, I think I'm better placed to know than GothAnneGorilla because I am the person who was deleted and who received an email about the deletion from MNHQ.

There is a long and complex discussion going on in FWR about possibly the most controversial issue that feminism has encountered ever. It is an issue which has divided feminists and others, as we can see from the existence of this thread.

I have posted quite a lot on the thread in question and I had a post deleted because it was reported. The post was not a personal attack, it was not goady, it did not contain any slurs. It contained an opinion, expressed in normal language with no insults, swearing or offensive words. The post was quite long and touched on a few issues, I put quite a bit of thought into it. It wasn't a 'ya boo sucks, youz are all haterz' type post.

It got deleted and I was a bit surprised because I didn't see what in the post could be considered to break MN guidelines. As it happens I still had the thread open on my PC with the deleted post still intact, I considered editing the post and taking out a section that I thought might have been the problem but I wasn't sure if it was against the rules to do that and I wasn't about to bother MNHQ by asking them.

In fact MNHQ had already sent me an email on the subject. The email was very straightforward and diplomatic and said that I had been deleted because the post had been reported, that they understood that the topic is very controversial, that they are OK with the topic being discussed but that there were two implications/assertions in my post that they didn't feel could be left to stand, but I could re-post the rest of the post if I took those bits out (surprisingly, they were not the bits I expected). A copy of the deleted post was included in the email.

So I did just that. I also posted on the thread to say what had gone on (MNHQ specified in the email that it was fine to say why I was reposting) and to say thank you to MNHQ for allowing controversial issues to be discussed and to express my appreciation for the way they had handled things.

GothAnneGorilla posted on the thread saying pretty much what she has here. I replied to her saying pretty much what I have here.

There is nothing sinister going on and I'm very sorry that my and MNHQ's openness has resulted in them being attacked on this thread. MNHQ did not advise me on how to 'bend' or 'get around' the guidelines. They told me to remove entirely two assertions. Off my own back I also tweaked some of the wording because I suspected that the post might get reported again so I changed some language that I know some MNers would consider transphobic (basically I removed the word 'male' and replaced it with 'XY'). MNHQ did not suggest that I do that - I decided to do it because I frankly couldn't be arsed to repost a post if it was only going to be reported again because some people consider the words 'male' or 'man' to be transphobic slurs when applied to people with XY chromosomes.

I am proud of MN for being a place where women can discuss one of the most controversial issues to affect us in sexual politics, there are fewer and fewer places on the internet where women can speak freely on an issue which has enormous ramifications for us.

What constitutes transphobia is also hugely controversial and accusations of transphobia are increasingly being used in order to shut down women's speech and to make it impossible for us to discuss women's issues. I think women should be very very concerned about that, not contributing to it.

GothAnneGorilla you are not the internet authority on what constitutes transphobia. I read this thread as an attempt to shut down other women because you disagree with their opinions.