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?

Yes, thank you MNHQ and , you do a great job.

If a person wants to wear a dress and be called Daphne then that is fine, whether they be a man or a woman. I am happy to call people whatever makes them happy.

But I will never accept that a person with a penis can be a woman. Never. No matter how many PMs certain people want to send me accusing me of transphobia.

Why are some people determined to have just two default choices 'Man' and 'Not man'? It's all very insulting.

Tiggy- I can't stand the word evil- even for people who commit hideous violent and cruel crimes.
But that aside, I understand your frustration. I am a woman and I find these threads incredibly depressing in terms of how they must read to anyone with gender identity disorders or their families.
Ive said before I would be happy to share my female spaces with anyone who identifies as a woman. Yes people will argue about men getting their kicks from dressing up as women etc but frankly these arguments seem to me like suggesting that allowing refugees to come to the uk in order to feel safe is like welcoming in isis.
I have rather lost the will with this argument here though as it does not seem to lead to anyone changing their minds. I post occasionally just so that if there is anyone reading who feels even more isolated by the majority of posters arguments they can know that there are people out there who feel differently.

TiggyD, I'm confused about how exactly you propose we discuss these issues.

I think this is the post you objected to on the 'Drag queens banned from Pride event' thread:

"So some men dressing as women are offended by some other men dressing as women because they think they are women whereas the second set don't think they are women. Women however are allowed no feelings about either type."

In your post above you've made it clear that we shouldn't be using the term transwomen either, because in your opinion transwomen don't want to be called trans. Here's what you said:

"The prefixes are only needed when talking about trans issues to distinguish between tran and cis women or men. Some would refer to women as either "transwomen" or "women". That's not treating everybody equally is it? Transwomen don't want to be called trans you know. If you get upset about the word cis but still use trans you're saying "how dare you insult us while we're insulting you!"

So, do you think MNHQ should have deleted the post entirely? Or asked that poster to reword it? And if the latter, could you please explain how the post could have been worded in a way that wouldn't cause offence? I'm genuinely baffled as to how we can discuss this issue if even the term 'transwomen' is considered out of bounds.

Unfortunately the proportion of women who have experienced male violence and would therefore be fearful of male bodied people in what should be female only spaces is much higher than the proportion of men who "feel female" and therefore wish to be allowed into female only spaces. Somehow though it is bigotted to want to put the feelings of the 20% of women who have been raped above the feelings of the 0.2% of men with lady brain.

I think you need to come up with a better argument then calling Tiggy a misogynist silencing women.

For those who read the recent "Why I don't post on FWR" threads, several WOMEN said that the trans obsession/hatred put them off.

I think his point about whether they would like a trans member of MN staff to be addressed in the same manner as trans people are on here, is an extremely valid one.

Yeah, have to say that the "Oh, everyone who posts on FWR is a nasty old meanie" litany is getting dull. Don't want to post on there, don't, do, great. It's not necessary to you or to the FWR posters that you be there.

Nice try though.

FWR is scary. So I have it hidden.

Here's MNHQ's response to the thread asking to include the term 'cis' as misgendering

Hi all,

Thanks for your posts and apologies for taking so long to get back to you.

Our stance on this is that we think there is a discussion to be had and we'd like MN to be a place where everyone can have that discussion.

We don't think flat banning certain terms is the way to go on this one at the moment. We think that folks should be civil and respectful of others and their points of view and by banning terms we would stifle discussion, we'd much rather look at each post in the context of the thread.

Having said that, if posters persistently misgender by using cis, or the incorrect pronoun intentionally to goad, then please do report and we will deal with them as a goady poster.

We will happily re look at this again and again until we have an overriding consensus from the MN community.

The discussions have been incredibly informative and we hope many people are reading them and learning more about Transgender and the varying views surrounding the terms involved.

Looks pretty reasonable to me and I will be reporting persistent use of 'cis' as GoadyFuckery.

It's not compulsory to post on any topic afaik?
I don't read fwr often, as I don't feel I have much to add to the debate.
Ditto re Caitlin Jenner. I wish her well. It must have been very hard living a lie all her life.
I genuinely think if people call her "he" it's probably by accident 90% of the time, no agenda or mocking intended.
Language is fluid and evolves over time...I think this is the case here.

Thanks for posting that Bore

So, the bulk of this Tiggy's hissy fit has already been answered then, nothing to see here, move along.

However, from now on, every time Tiggy uses the expression "cis" I'll be reporting him, he knows (because he's be asked before) that women find it misgendering, so he must just be continuing to do it to be a GoadyFucker.

Yes, it's also pretty clear that MNHQ would expect any trans employee to be referred to by the name and pronoun they wished to be referred to as.

So, another of OPs questions to MNHQ answered.

MNHQ, I think you walk the line well. Thanks.

So is tiggy basically saying she wants to be called just a woman but bio women are ok to be called cis women?

it kind of feels like women are being budged out of the way yet again so a male can take that space - yet again .

I would also say there are waaaay more posters in this thread that take offence to being called cis.

We were here first and all that....

Tiggy, as far as we know, neither has nor wants a vagina. His hobbies include trying to silence women on subjects that are important to us but don't affect him in any way, PMing women unwelcomly to tell them that they are being transphobic and bigotted and generally being a goady fucker. His super power is imperviousness to the MN ban hammer.

Really Queen? Blimey. PMs?

Yes Sparkling. Although he does deny he's sent them....

He actually did admit to it on a thread.

Here's the post where WeirdCatLady first says that she's been PMed and here's the post where Tiggy admitted to it.

I have to admit I had never heard the term "cis woman" before and this is not a topic I am familiar with. But my gut instinct is that being called a cis woman makes me feel like I'm not a woman at all. Or even a 2nd class type of woman. And that simply by being a woman I have not had enough of a womanly experience to understand how a trans woman understands womanhood.. I don't like it.

I am speechless Queen. Why on earth would someone do that?

Sorry Queen, you're quite right, he didn't deny sending it to her, he merely denied that it said what it said.

Oops.

My guess is because he enjoys bullying women.