Is Mumsnet HQ evil or not very bright.

[TiggyD]

As some of you may already know you're allowed to call transgendered women "men in dresses" and refer to them as "he" and "him.

"So some men dressing as women..." as one posted said in relation to trans women got the reply from RebeccaMN:

We agree that this post is in poor taste but we don't tend to delete on those grounds because it would be really hard to know where to draw the line.
The truth is, we don't think we should be the arbiters of what people should find offensive and what they shouldn't. In these instances, it's very rare that a tasteless comment is left unchallenged, and we would highly recommend that you put forward your point of view on the thread.

Well firstly I think Mumsnet should draw the line at discrimination of a protected minority group.

Secondly, if MN don't think they should be the arbiters of what people should find offensive, maybe they should ask a representative from a human rights or anti discrimination group? Misgendering is always wrong.

Thirdly, is it rare an tasteless comment is unchallenged? Now the trans people on Mumsnet refuse to post on trans related threads who the hell is going to challenge them?

Fourthly, that post was unchallenged. Have a look at the thread.

Fifthly, "tasteless"? "TASTELESS"?! WTF? Tofu is tasteless. Would MNHQ describe calling people spastics or coons or faggots as tasteless? Misgendering is a put-down towards an entire minority. Dismissed as tasteless.

A quick look at a quote about the 2010 equality act:
"harassment - unwanted behaviour linked to a protected characteristic that violates someone’s dignity or creates an offensive environment for them".

Is there harassment in trans related threads on here? Is the dignity of all transwomen violated by referring to them all as men in dresses? Bleedingly obviously yes. Does it create an offensive environment for them? How the hell could it not? Does Mumsnet do anything to stop it? No.

-----------------

It all makes me wonder if the people of MNHQ are deliberately letting all this unkindness and discrimination and harassment go on because they evil, or because they don't know any better.
I think I have it. I reckon it's like the Ricky Gervais thing where he started doing "Mong" faces. All kinds of people told him it was offensive and an unkind name for people with Downs Syndrome but he refused to accept it. I think he thought that as he believed himself to be a good person, and he used the word mong, that mong had to be an acceptable word because he was good. I think it must be like that in MNHQ. They believe themselves to be good people and when they allow people to call transwomen men on thier site it's fine because their belief in themselves being good trumps all the views of the victims.

-----------------

One question for MNHQ that I alluded to earlier. Have you ever asked any kind of trans, human rights, or anti-discrimination group about how to treat trans people?

Have you?

Ever?

Well indeed. The thread title is awful.

My issue is that MNHQ allow misgendering. They allow it for the protected group as a whole, and particularly celebrities, such as Caitlyn Jenner

MNHQ allow posters to use offensive terms about protected groups. They don't allow personal attacks on individual posters. For instance, according to the link upthread, 'religion and belief' can be a protected characteristic. Well, you'll find threads where people say some things about one group or another (be it christians, atheists, muslims or whatever) which would not be allowed to be applied to an individual poster. People seem to be allowed to refer to celebrities in terms which wouldn't be allowed for a poster - I'm not sure if that should be the case but seems to be.

Tiggy.

...and call people by the pronouns which they do not want to be known as, which is wrong offensive and disrespectful.

Such as cis? You have a very large double standard going on there.

In the past, I was willing to pretend a man could be a woman as a matter of politeness and recognition of the difficult situation some people find themselves in, on the understanding that everyone knows it is a pretence. I'm not willing to say I actually believe something that is patently false e.g. the female penis or that MTTs are actually women. As a matter of politics, I think it is very dangerous when people are willing to stand up and proclaim that "2 + 2 = 5" for exactly the reason Orwell chose this example to make his point in 1984. For the likes of Owen Jones to say it is unacceptable to say that MTTs are not female is a dangerous place to be politically and laws should not be based on lies. The reason for stating the lie is not relevant, no matter how painful it might be to an individual.

It is a lie to call a man "woman" or "she" or "her" or to call a woman "man" or "he" or "him", just as it is to call an anorexic "fat". There may be some circumstances I might lie to spare the feelings of someone IRL but in general it is not respectful to tell lies to people, in fact it is condescending and disrespectful. It says "I do not think you are capable of hearing the truth".

I have to thank the OP, I would not have been aware of this issue was it not for his interesting heading.

I have now done a lot of reading (a lot it's raining here) and I am glad that he pointed me in a direction that was not on my radar.

Unfortunately, for the OP, this has led to many discussions today with my female friends. Summary below;

No issues with pronouns at all
No issues of dressing as you wish

That said the idea of a a cis female went down like a lead stone.

ego it would depend on how I met them. As I said, I might lie to spare someone's feelings IRL. If a bride about to go down the aisle asked "do I look fat in this" there is no way I would say "yes". But if I was shopping with the bride and she asked the same question, I would say "that dress is not flattering you".

If I was introduced to an MTT in social setting, I would probably avoid using any gendered terminology. If the person said "I am female, am I not?" I would say "no" and I would consider that an aggressive, gaslighting question.

I think it is great when men wear "women's clothes" and say "I am a man and I will wear what I want" not as a parody of women but e.g. Eddie Izzard "these are not women's clothes, they are my clothes". That is fucking with gender and expanding what it means to be a man.

Of course I wouldn't blurt out apropos of nothing that a trans woman was not a biological woman, Ego. But in a debate about the issues then I am going to state my pov.
In asocial or business etc situation they are going to be the person in front of me before their gender or sexuality anyway. I can't see the subject coming up at all unless one of us raises it. Goes without saying that I would address them as they wish to be addressed. They remain, however, a male who has, or is the process of doing so, transitioned to female as far as biology allows (so, very much on the surface, not any deeper than that)

I'm with you Flora, completely

^LEAD BALLOON!

I think that Eddie Izzard has it bang on ,I've always wondered why we are now sticking to to the "norm"

Because it's not controversial to say that a biological male is a biological male. If someone goes on to say it's weird or unnatural etc then that's overstepping the line (and before words get attributed to me and twisted around as usually happens I do not think the latter).

They are entitled to disagree. Still doesn't put saying it on a par with the examples of racism etc you gave above, so not deletable.

"In the past, I was willing to pretend a man could be a woman as a matter of politeness and recognition of the difficult situation some people find themselves in, on the understanding that everyone knows it is a pretence"

You're saying that no one on on MN let alone out there in the real world
believes that there could be a biological cause and it's all in fact a
pretence"

Ego - Do you have problems with English comprehension? That is not what Flora says AT ALL in the sentence you replied to.

There might very well be a biological cause why a man believes that he is a woman despite all physical evidence to the contrary. The pretence Flora talks about is not "They are pretending when they say they feel like women" but what the rest of us do when we call them "she" and pretend they are actually women so as not to hurt their feelings.

Someone who understands basic biology.

A man can become a trans woman. They cannot become a biological woman.

But biology is a fact, that shouldn't be controversial.

And pretending that there are no differences between trans women and women is having some pretty serious consequences for women.

It's not racist to say that black people are more likely to suffer from sickle cell anaemia, or that fair skinned people need to use sunscreen. These are facts, not judgements.

Saying that men are not women and can't become women is a fact not a judgement.