My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Site stuff

MNHQ: Mumsnet and transphobia - our thoughts

169 replies

SarahMumsnet · 03/07/2014 10:23

Hey everyone,

Thanks to all for your posts on this issue - we appreciate them, and have read through them all in order to take everyone’s views into account. We’ve had a lengthy discussion - several, in fact - at MNHQ on how to move forward re transphobia on Mumsnet, and this is where we’ve landed.

Firstly: we need to hold up our hands. Mumsnet is a general interest site; we moderate across a wide host of issues on a daily basis, and can’t claim to be experts in any one field. As a result, our policy in terms of Talk Guidelines and what we deem deletable has always been inclusive rather than exclusive: we find it more sustainable to operate under broad principles of mutual respect and courtesy, rather than specifying what users can and can’t say on any given topic.

Having thought about it, therefore, we’ve decided we want to apply those same broad principles when it comes to transphobia, rather than coming up with a “Mumsnet” definition of what transphobia is, or with a list of specific deletable transgressions. We realise that several of you have asked for just such a list, on the very reasonable grounds that transgenderism is, for some, an area about which they know little, and it would therefore be helpful to have a clear set of “you can say this/you can’t say that” guidelines. Our reasons for not wanting to go down that route are as follows:

  1. we don’t do this for any other type of deletable offence - racism, sexism, homophobia, disabilism or ageism

  2. we’re poorly placed to do it. We can’t claim to be experts in transgenderism; therefore, for us to come up with a definition of what we believe it to be would, we feel, be presumptuous

  3. part of the reason we haven’t done so for any other “ism” is because it’s impossible to make such a list definitive. For every ruling we make (“it’s transphobic to say X”) 3/10/a thousand more questions will arise (“what about if you say Y?”)

  4. such a list wouldn’t take any account of context. As I said above, many of the people who suggested a definition/list would be useful did so because of the lack of knowledge and clarity around the issue. Having given this some thought, and in particular, having read the recent thread on the subject in Chat, it seems to us that folk might very reasonably ask questions around transgenderism that are purely in the spirit of enquiry and in no way intended to give offence but which might, under specific guidelines on wording, be construed as transphobic. We’ve no wish at all to stifle discussion of an issue that is, rightly, gaining visibility - in fact, we think it’d be counterproductive.

    Currently, we don’t specifically mention transphobia in the list of offences we delete for in the Talk Guidelines. We’ll amend that now, so it’s spelled out to anyone using the website that transphobia is not welcome on Mumsnet. We’ll also change the Lesbian and Gay Parents topic to LGBT Parents, as suggested, to make it consistent with our LGBT Children topic.

    Ultimately, we think one of the real strengths of MN is that it allows users to have robust disagreements about difficult topics, but without hate speech, and without comments that are just plain mean or personally directed at other posters. If there are any posts that you think we need to look at please flag them up by hitting the 'Report' button and we'll always take a look.

    Apols for the essay. Hope all of this makes sense, and you can follow our reasoning on it. Please let us know what you think and as ever, thanks for the input. Flowers

    MNHQ
OP posts:
Report
limitedperiodonly · 03/07/2014 20:10

goshannegorilla I hope you realise that I have no wish to fight with you.

I just do not agree with you on this issue. Telly and other less important issues, would be a different matter.

The person who suggested the F-Word's policy may have an agenda or he may simply just like it. I'm not an avid reader of the F-Word but I've noticed that it has become more inclusive and less 'scary', for want of a better word, which I believe betrays its essential principles. That makes me quite cross.

But it's a commercial enterprise, as is Mumsnet, so ultimately it should do as it sees fit.

But it was helpful of various posters to steer Mumsnet away from formulating a transphobia policy, possibly based on a relatively mainstream site as the F-Word, that would have clashed horribly, not only with MN campaigns but language and issues used and raised thousands of times a day.

Not least because they'd have to have an awful lot of interns pressing the red button at MNHQ.

Report
mathanxiety · 03/07/2014 20:10

I posted this on the Transphobia II thread in Chat:

Aggressive transactivists who are biological men yet do not feel they are men have only the genderised concept of women to fall back on. The existence of the narrow 'man or woman' choice and the fact that it was invented and then policed by men for the benefit of (straight) men makes the insistence on being treated as women yet another version of allowing men to continue to define themselves as 'not women'. This doesn't help any women, straight or gay. It doesn't help any man, straight or gay, who is not comfortable with the genderised role assigned to him. All it accomplishes is reinforce the genderised polarity.

Report
mathanxiety · 03/07/2014 20:13

GoshAnne -- Tiggy lauded the F word guidelines.

Report
ArcheryAnnie · 03/07/2014 20:16

Indeed - there was at least one person who asked for F-word-style guidelines.

Report
TunipTheUnconquerable · 03/07/2014 20:27

Tiggy asked for the F-Word guidelines repeatedly.

Maybe he's posting as a double agent.

Report
ICanHearYou · 03/07/2014 20:27

Yes this idea of 'feeling like a woman' is irrational. It is impossible for a man to 'feel like a woman' they can only feel like a mans perception of a woman.

Report
CoteDAzur · 03/07/2014 20:58

Gosh re "No one asked for guidelines like the F-word. The posting of the F word guidelines was purposely posted by someone very much opposed to MNHQ making any attempt to stem transphobia."

Actually, it was kim who posted the F-word guidelines on transphobia on that first thread you created on Site Stuff which kickstarted this whole debate:

kim147 Mon 30-Jun-14 15:49:09
This is the F -words position on transphobia
We reject as transphobic:
Any assertion that trans women are not “real" women, or that trans men are not “real" men, and any assertions that we consider, to the best of our judgement, to stem from this belief.
Any assertion that trans women are men, or that trans men are women, and any assertions that we consider, to the best of our judgement, to stem from this belief.
Any assertion that trans women should be excluded from women-only spaces, or from accessing services that are designed for women.
Any assertion that trans people are mentally ill. This is also disablist.
Any assertion that trans people have no place in feminism.
Transphobic comments, or those which engage in trans-misogyny, as defined above, will not be published. However, the content of these comments may be shared between bloggers or contributors and then addressed in articles (without naming the commenter), or directly in an e-mail to the commenter, in an effort to tackle transphobic attitudes and behaviour.

Report
kim147 · 03/07/2014 21:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur · 03/07/2014 21:11

So? Gosh is still wrong in saying "F-word guidelines was purposely posted by someone very much opposed to MNHQ making any attempt to stem transphobia."

Those guidelines were "purposefully" posted by you. Are you very much opposed to MNHQ making any attempt to stem transphobia?

Report
kim147 · 03/07/2014 21:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GoshAnneGorilla · 03/07/2014 21:27

Fine. I was wrong about who mentioned the F-word guidelines first. But they weren't held up as how things must be around here by all those unhappy with how trans threads are on here.

As I've stated elsewhere, the trans threads IMO feel like people gleefully demonizing a section of society in the guise of somehow benefitting womankind. The persistently poor treatment of kim in these threads, underlines that. I've been on those threads a long time and it has always been the same.

Report
PlentyOfPubeGardens · 03/07/2014 21:31

99 times out of 100 the sex of a poster is of no consequence, however just occasionally it's worth taking note of. The only person I have seen who is actively for something like the F-word guidelines is a man (Tiggy). It's not his rights that are being threatened by transactivists. I think he has a fucking cheek.

Report
CoteDAzur · 03/07/2014 21:44

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

kim147 · 03/07/2014 21:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Feenie · 03/07/2014 21:52

I haven't read any of the previous threads, but it is very, very obvious from this one to see which posters are deeply unpleasant and which are not. Sad

Report
ICanHearYou · 03/07/2014 21:56

I think bully is the equivalent of Godwins Law here everyone.

Report
CoteDAzur · 03/07/2014 21:58

Why on earth did you get my previous post deleted? Confused

All I said was "I can see where ICan is coming from" re making threads about oneself, and then gave the example that I often go on threads where people talk about where I'm born without making it personal and getting emotionally involved.

UN-believable Hmm

Report
Feenie · 03/07/2014 22:03

MN delete, Cote - you can't possibly know who reported them.

If you don't approve, talk to them. Don't speculate and target someone you suspect reported it.

I suspect it received many reports, and your last post is likely to as well.

Report
kim147 · 03/07/2014 22:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur · 03/07/2014 22:06

What was the personal attack, kim? Please do say.

As I recall, it was a general comment about myself. What I do on threads that are personal to me.

Report
Feenie · 03/07/2014 22:08

It's a personal attack to have a go at someone for 'getting' your thread deleted.

And also ridiculously juvenile.

Report
kim147 · 03/07/2014 22:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

kim147 · 03/07/2014 22:13

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur · 03/07/2014 22:17

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

kim147 · 03/07/2014 22:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.