Thoughts on MNHQ's response to the Spartacus thread

[OlennasWimple]

As the Spartacus thread is about to reach capacity, here's a new thread to discuss MNHQ's response to the issues raised on that thread and in a few other places over the last week or so.

is lesphobic to insist that a lesbian likes penis. Feck off with that shite.
Add message | Report | Message poster KateMumsnet (MNHQ) Tue 30-Aug-16 21:08:00
Hello all

Thanks for all your input on this - we've been listening and thinking hard.

Couple of quick points to clear up: it's actually not the case that people have been banned solely for misgendering - it will have been part of a broader discussion here about whether that poster is able to stick to the rules generally.

We must admit to being slightly taken aback at being cast, by some, as the evil slave-baiting Roman republic in this grin - as lots of you have pointed out, Mumsnet remains one of the few places where these issues can be discussed at all. It would have been much, much easier (both in terms of the resource and the toll on our moderators' sanity!) to shut down the debate as others have done, but instead we are working hard to find a realistic balance between free speech and being a space which welcomes everyone.

From our perspective, the whole issue is pretty much covered by our Talk Guidelines. If people are using sex-at-birth pronouns to provoke, inflame, or belittle, then that's against the rules and will usually have to go. If it happens as part of an otherwise broadly respectful (even if heated) discussion, we look at it in that context and take a view.

Some of you have pointed out a disjunct between allowing posts which mirror mainstream scientific thinking, while asking MNers not to describe a trans woman as 'he'. We can see your point on this,and also accept that there is a fair amount of dodgy stuff on the trans side that can rightly be described as anti-feminist and regressive - but what we'd ask you to think about is the impact on the parent who's not an activist, and likely isn't even posting, but whose adult child is transitioning, or who is doing so themselves. Would they feel belittled, mocked or attacked? Would they think Mumsnet was not for them? If so, we're going to have to remove it. It's a fudge, but it's the best we can do at this stage.

In all but the most extreme headline-grabbing cases, we do think it's possible to debate the core principles without referring to individuals in a way which will cause hurt. Most of you have said that when talking to a trans person face-to-face you wouldn't insist on using birth pronouns or names - and generally, on this and other issues, we encourage people to treat others with the same courtesy they'd use in real life. For every MNer who posts on a thread there are likely to be ten who are lurking - statistically, some of those will be trans or love someone who is, and we need to take account of them too.

We hope that makes our thinking a bit clearer overall. Do continue to tell us your thoughts - it's probably unrealistic to think that this issue will be quickly resolved here or across society as a whole, but it would be brilliant if MN could be part of the solution, we think.

MNHQ

"I don't think Blistory is suggesting giving way or meek acceptance. S/he is asking for all out but targeted fight. I think."

Yes; as she says: "What I am concerned about is influencing the next Gender Recognition Act or whatever legislation is coming next. I won't have any influence if I come from a place of hostility that attacks a minority group no matter if I'm righter than right."

My experience of having these conversations in real life is that any hint of anger, negative generalisations about trans people etc automatically makes people shut down and write you off as a bigot.

Whereas saying, "Well, of course fully transitioned transwomen should be sent to women's prisons [which I believe anyway], but there are quite a few cases of transwomen who haven't had hormone treatment or surgery sexually assaulting other women in the prison, so I'm less sure about that"; or

"Well of course adults who know their own mind should be allowed hormone treatment, but I worry about adolescents doing so because the evidence suggests that the majority won't turn out trans in adult life"

really does make people stop and think a bit.

Hey, PD. Rough day ?

The only thing I'm conceding is a bit of courtesy to individuals on an Internet forum. And yes, I do believe that progress is being made but you only see that when you take the discussion offline away from transactivists. I've been stuck for years at the penis does not equal woman bit of the discussion and it goes nowhere.

Eh?

YY, Irene. Much more eloquently put and punctuated.

The only thing is the people who are banned. It goes against free speech and points only to kowtowing to the trans agenda.

Now I see the sacrificial lamb argument but still makes me

I've been stuck for years at the penis does not equal woman bit of the discussion and it goes nowhere

And this is why TAs may well win

Blistory
Do you know how much money a certain transwoman billionaire pumps into ensuring that transgender issues stay front and centre ? Do you know how active one of the top earning CEOs in the US is in promoting trans issues ?

• Are you talking about the Koch brothers? It would certainly be in their interests

Are you in the know or speculating? Come on, spill

It's funny that free speech gets taken seriously as an answer to why men should be able to film up women's skirts and post said photos on the Internet, but not this.

Well, we all know that double standards/double speak is alive and well, don't we?

I'm another who'd love to know who is pulling the strings.

There was a suggestion on here before that it is pharmaceutical companies looking for life long clients who are putting the money up. And we know there is no shortage of misogynists and autogynephiliacs who would be easy to convert into enthusiastic footsoldiers, on the backs of your common or garden transsexual or even cross dresser. And politicians and policy makers keen to collect their Progressive sticker without discomfiting anyone who matters.

So, yeah, that makes sense - but I'm only surmising.

Come on Blistery stop with the drip feeding

There was a suggestion on here before that it is pharmaceutical companies looking for life long clients who are putting the money up.

I could believe that, but cannot imagine that the numbers stack up: even if every single adolescent who once thought about what it might be like to be the opposite sex could be recruited, the numbers surely of people actually embarking down this route must be too small to make it worthwhile the most cynical pharmaceutical company's time and money?!

I think there was a suggestion at one time that because HRT isn't prescribed as much nowadays due to health risks, big pharma companies needed a new client base for artificial hormones.

IBelieveTheEarthIsFlat

My guess would be Jennifer Pritzker

I'm inclined to think it would be better to discuss how to move forward constructively (thanks blistory and irene) rather than indulging in something like conspiracy theory-ish.

So next small steps that we can achieve individually is to find out schools policies and public funding. Ensuring any changes to law don't go unnoticed.

I don't want MNHQ to come down on one side or the other. And I certainly don't want to be angry with any class of people, or make negative generalisations about anyone. I do want to know that reasoned posts based on proven scientific facts, or discussing evidence, won't be deleted because those facts or research may upset someone. A forum like this is political and public - and truth matters.

Where else can we take the fight to? Is there a manifesto somewhere?

Agendas like this are not pushed so quickly without a lot of support.

and btw I was quoting Blistory above. Go look

I have just googled Jennfer Pritzer.

Lightbulb moment.

(And I agree with Blistory).

*PritzKer

I wasn't intending to imply that there was some trans mafia behind all this.

Google the Trans Global Initiative if you're that interested. It show the huge push going on to centre trans issues in the global arena. Look at the funding increases in the last five years. Those funds aren't going on building refuges or domestic violence campaigns but are being spent on putting transwomen into influential positions. Heading up human rights committees, LGBT groups, political lobbying etc. That filters down through social media which is an explosive mix when used by the marginalised and disenfranchised or the just plain trendy, liberal progressive youth.

This isn't conspiracy theory stuff - just the good old patriarchy doing what it does best - protecting the interests of rich, white men mainly. Many of the people funding these initiatives appear to be following a Caitlyn Jenner like path of successful career as a man, marriage, children, late transitioning, history of cross dressing. Not really the same trajectory as a young, suicidal boy or a poor, black transwoman. If I can advocate for the rights of women without stepping on the latter two I'd prefer to do so. The first type of transwomen mentioned above, the rich, white, homophobic men ? Couldn't care less about them

Seriously, arguments on pronouns really are insignificant in the bigger scheme of things. Preventing this lobbying from having a political impact over here is the only thing that is going to work.

Wonder if Matt Bomer and Mark Ruffalo are heading towards Peak Trans, they're copping it big from the trans community and their supporters.

I wondered how long it would take before "TERF" was mentioned.

I'm still out, did we establish where we can migrate to yet?

(Someone said there was a FB group, but I'm not on there)

My peak trans moment came from that God awful ALW ( amazing leftie women) a Facebook group of. 20000 who joined post the tories getting elected. I was completely unaware that just anyone could say they're a woman and most others would go along with it, that the thing (vagina, breasts actually being female) meant nothing to transactivists and that they really hate us for it ( even though it doesn't exist.). I was shocked to learn that women, special kool Aid drinking head so far leaning in understanding they could barely stand competitively accepting women, were happy to put the needs of transwomen before women, that it was bigoted to say you didn't want to piss or change next to s transwoman, that your your young daughter would fear a transwoman in their space.... A very verbally aggressive transwoman came into the space, ALW, and told hilarious jokes about tying up women (ha ha girls) to radiators and letting them die in a basement, when challenged she had to tell me that she was more woman than me, more nurturing, more feminine...An admin messaged me to tell me the transwomans "male voice" that she could hear in her posts were triggering as she had been a victim of sustained violence herself. However the same admin, in public, also toed the line of transwomen are women....

Your account is very peculiar, as I don't remember that at all and I'm in all the ALW groups. What I do remember is a close friend of mine setting up a feminist group, which is extremely transphobic, and was disfranchised from the main ALW heading due to its content eg calling transwomen vile rapists. Another intersectional feminist group was set up and most people migrated over to that, because guess what? The majority of liberal feminists are not gender critical and do not support the work of Bindel etc. Gender critical feminism is exclusively a RadFem stance, hence the word TERF thrown about. I personally do not vieW TERF as a slur, I think it's pretty accurate. Trans Exclusive RadFem. RadFems exclude trans people from their discussion. It isn't intersectional, therefore it is exclusionary.