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?

Cis means gender identity allies with biological sex. It's predicated on the theory that we all have an innate gender identity that is distinct to our sex and they are completed unrelated, so they can either match (cis gender) or not match (trans gender)

Gender critical feminists tend to believe that gender identity is not an innate quality that exists as distinct to sex, rather it is a socially constructed narrative that develops as a result of living in society as one sex or the other. Therefore cis gender becomes a meaningless term.

Also, many people don't have a strong gender identity, or any at all. They see themselves as woman or man by virtue of their sex, not their innate gender identity. Also making cis gender a meaningless term.

Finally, cis woman and trans woman takes the word woman and divides it into two distinct categories which is entirely unnecessary. There are not cis women and trans women, there are women and trans women. The word woman has a perfectly serviceable definition and there is no need to redefine it. Trans women are a class of people distinct to women.

cis is used to mean someone born into a gender and identifying with it.

The opposite of trans.

It is coined by the transgender movement. So none of us are 'women' or indeed all of us are women. Just some of us are cis and some trans.

It is also a fairly derogatory term. And many (cis) women refute it and have asked for it not to be used.

The OP continues to use it.

Great so cis just actually stops women being women because some one else wants to get under the umberella too.

Ok

This thread and every other thread I've ever read on this topic only reinforces my view that trans people and trans issues are being massively manipulated with one purpose in mind and that purpose is misogyny. Don't ever describe me as cis op.

Thanks Ehric. I think I finally get what cis means now. Very clear, thanks.

Haven't you described yourself along the lines of 'a bloke in a dress' in the past, OP?

Re 'cis' - yep, Goady misgendering flows pretty freely in both directions.

I have never heard of 'cis' until I read about it on MN, and I don't like it.

I don't identify particularly as female or male - I identify as myself, whatever that means, but I am biologically a woman.

Any attempt to describe my identity in terms of gender is pointless. Just because I identify with a lot of traditionally masculine traits doesn't mean I'm suddenly a trans man.

What if my 'gender identity' doesn't line up with my biology, but I don't choose to do anything about it, like dress in some parody of 'men's clothes' or get face changing surgery?

What am I then? Not a cis woman as my identity doesn't match my biology. Not a trans man as I haven't made any attempt to 'become' or behave like a man.

I don't have a name in that situation.

And no one has the right to call me a cis woman, or anything else, which assumes I identify as female just because I was born a woman and I look like a woman from the outside. They don't know what goes on in my mind, or how I identify.

The whole POINT of trans is that people adjust their behaviours, clothes and physiology in order to be recognised as someone from a certain sex.

The entire concept hoists itself on its own petard because there is no permanent line drawn between women's clothes/faces/behaviours and those of men...pink was a boy's colour, now it's a girl's - you know, you could say that Caitlyn Jenner's silky outfit is 'men's clothes' because they are being worn by someone biologically male, and they are the sort of clothes which are common to a lot of transvestite men.

Where does that leave us? It's farcical. It really is.

This thread and every other thread I've ever read on this topic only reinforces my view that trans people and trans issues are being massively manipulated with one purpose in mind and that purpose is misogyny.

YY to this Northernlurker - with the added bonus of allowing inadequate Social Justice Warrior-type men to retain an aura of championing equality while telling women to STFU.

Don't ever describe me as cis op

YY to this too.

I mean I can see where it all comes from. The fact that a lot of men like to dress in traditionally female clothing. Well that's fine, but it temds to be mainly other blokes who would beat them up for doing so.

The oppression they are fighting against, legitimately in my view, is not coming from women or from the wider public. It's coming from a very deep seated fear, mainly among other men, of appearing to be feminine, or different, or homosexual, or whatever.

It terrifies a lot of men. And they like to attack it.

I would like to see transgender, or transvestite should I say, people, protected from discrimination, and that goes without saying. I want it to be alright for men to dress in skirts just as I am free to wear trousers.

What I don't want is for women to be shoved out of the way to enable this.

Jeez, i have no idea what this is all about, way over my head with that OP
What exactly are you trying to say?

I hear of cis all the time, it's used by many many people mostly those describing themselves.

And yes I agree with this thread somewhat. The transphobic comments I've seen on here are quite frankly disgusting.

You know what could be transphobic?

Someone pretending they're on the side of trans people but having such a minority and contentious view that it leads people to believe a greater number of trans people think like them.

Because I have never met a trans person who wanted to infringe on women's rights in real life. Never.

In fact when the women's centre set up a trans group that met off site not one person postulated the view they were 'women' and should be able to meet in the women's centre.

Just pointing out that anyone who takes such a minority view is NOT representative of the trans popn.

grays just because some women call themselves cis women, doesn't make it cool.

If that were the case the word 'nigger' would be finne

There was an interesting thread on using cis as misgendering last month...
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/2393475-Would-MNHQ-consider-extending-the-definition-of-misgendering?pg=1&order=

I wonder how many trans men insist on using cis men?

I didn't say that it was, but since it's widely used I can see why someone would think it's okay to use it.

And lets not even try and compare it to nigger, that's ridiculous. Cis is a label yes, but not one entrenched with such prejudice and history as the word 'nigger'. Cis was coined to quickly differentiate between trans and not-trans in conversation or debate. Not to belittle, cause harm and hurt like some people think. If that

I find the term cis offensive. I am a woman, end of!

Cis is widely used?

The fuck it is.

Yes, it is. Maybe not in your circles or lives but in plenty of others it is. I think the fact cisgender has now been added to the dictionary proves how widely used it is.

I have never heard the term cis used anywhere other than mn.

What is wrong with 'woman' and 'transwoman'?

Nothing wrong with 'woman' and 'transwoman' IMO.