Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Thoughts on MNHQ's response to the Spartacus thread

991 replies

OlennasWimple · 30/08/2016 22:23

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
19
CoteDAzur · 01/09/2016 06:29

"Gender critical feminism is exclusively a RadFem stance"

Wrong.

I am not Rad Fem (most obviously, due to my view on porn) but am most definitely on the side of biology and objective reality. And therefore against the gaslighting Newspeak of transactivists.

aleanasjourney · 01/09/2016 06:40

"Autogynephilia" is a sex-fueled mental illness made up by Ray Blanchard. Blanchard defines it as "a man's paraphilic tendency to be sexually aroused by the thought or image of himself as a woman."

"Autogynephilia" is quackery, if you chose to believe in pseudoscientific theory can we go back to bloodletting? Cause that worked wonders!

microferret · 01/09/2016 07:13

Autogynephilia is a very real thing, aleana. Read this thoughtful essay by trans woman Ann Lawrence for more insight on the topic annelawrence.com/becoming_what_we_love.pdf

Blistory · 01/09/2016 07:29

Holding my hand up here as a liberal feminist who is gender critical and who apparently doesn't exist.

TwatbadgingCuntfuckery · 01/09/2016 07:46

micro Interesting piece.

The fetishes as written in the DSM include things such as Transvestic fetishism - hetero men (this now includes women but its not as common) who gain sexual arousal from wearing women's clothes. commonly very feminine items such as underwear, stockings, heels and silky nightwear. It is only diagnosed if a man is distressed by these feelings and seeks help. A few of the articles I have read suggest a man who has the above may later be diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Some have.

So the question I'm curious about is due to the much higher proportion of transwomen to transmen is it possible that some are possibly dealing with sexual fetishes and disorders under the paraphilia category and by assuming they are transgender first their needs are not being met with regards to appropriate treatment and this in itself could be part of the reason some commit suicide or continue to a lead a very unhappy life even after they change gender?

I know its a controversial suggestion but I am genuinely curious is there could be a possibility of misdiagnosis. It happens all the time with complex MH conditions.

microferret · 01/09/2016 07:55

twatbadging I expect that happens regularly. I also suspect that because now it is only politically correct to discuss dodgy "physiological" causes of dysphoria, rather than latent homosexuality, social / familial factors and of course paraphilias, many dysphoric people are not getting the care that they need, and are instead being told that transition will solve everything and is risk-free. TRAs call any attempt to help dysphoric people desist "conversion therapy" and I think I'm right in saying that in the US it is illegal to suggest any such therapy to youths with dysphoria.

MatildaOfTuscany · 01/09/2016 07:56

fruit, what do you think "gender critical" means, out of interest? Because I suspect you may be interpreting it to mean something different from the rest of us? As I pointed out upthread there are gender critical lib fems, gender critical women who don't like to call themselves feminists (and I should have added but was rushing things on my phone - gender critical transwomen).

Btw you really can rule out the "big pharma seeking out new markets now women are scared of hrt" conspiracy theory - my hrt, for instance, actually costs less than the prescription charges I pay for it (googled for entirely unrelated reasons a couple of years ago).

microferret · 01/09/2016 08:02

FruitCider it's getting increasingly hard to take you seriously - you seem to only speak in hyperbole, you think that being a woman is apparently only skin-deep, and you think that calling people TERFs is totally acceptable. Of course it isn't only radfems who are gender critical. There are lots of liberal feminists who feel this way. There are lots of people who feel this way, full stop. The women on here are expressing their opinions in a courteous, nuanced manner. You don't have to agree with us but at least get your facts straight and stop with the wild exaggerations. It does your cause no favours.

Lalsy · 01/09/2016 08:13

Fruit, I am a liberal feminist. Always have been. I am gender critical. Always have been - even though I only heard the term recently in this context of the trans agenda.

IrenetheQuaint · 01/09/2016 08:41

I'm a gender-critical liberal feminist too. Generally I have a live and let live approach and I am not remotely bothered by the existence of a few fully transitioned/transitioning transsexuals. And I really dislike the hatespeak against trans people I've encountered occasionally on the internet.

But I think the whole phenomenon has gone bonkers over the last few years and I am very seriously opposed to people being allowed to define their legal sex purely on the basis of self-identification, which seems to me a significant risk at the moment.

FRETGNIKCUF · 01/09/2016 08:59

*fruit cider

weirdly I don't remember anyone called fruit cider
*
I know the feminist group that branched off though, a close friend of yours??? Doubt it

FRETGNIKCUF · 01/09/2016 09:01

*Fruit
*
I do remember A whole host of women fawning over pictures of the transwoman.... Unlike anything they'd do for actual women.

Are you really doubting my account?

ErrolTheDragon · 01/09/2016 09:12

I'm honestly not sure what sort of feminist I am, I don't really know all the theory and what the labels mean .... Pretty sure more liberal than radical though. And def 'gender critical' though I only heard the term recently. Are there many feminists who aren't 'gender critical'? I'm struggling to imagine what that stance could be. ^^

FRETGNIKCUF · 01/09/2016 09:15

*Aleana
*
I know transwomen who admit to being autogynophiles, are you asserting they don't know themselves?

Reading blogs on transwomen talking about vaginas, using really male voices to describe them in graphic detail and how much they want one, or how their created one is fresh and clean unlike the foul stench of a "cis" one tells me that autogynophilia is a real thing.

TwatbadgingCuntfuckery · 01/09/2016 09:17

microferret that is such a shame its illegal. By discussing and questioning these other possibilities before a gender dysporia diagnosis is made we could successfully reduce the suicide/self harm/depression rates and help better treat the actual issue.

I don't think exploring all medical/mental health possibilities is 'conversion therapy' its certainly not helpful at all for TRAs insist that's the case.

I also don't think its dangerous to insist upon talking therapies to explore an individual persons gender crisis before placing the label of 'trans' on them either via Drs or themselves. I don't think (in the UK at least) the waiting period for hormone medications is long enough to fully explore other avenues. It certainly shouldn't be given to children with fragile MH. TRAs will disagree.

By exploring an individual's gender crisis you can get to the root of the issue - they could be gay, they may be or have been suffering abuse at home - I read a large number of trans individuals had suffered abuse as a child so I can understand switching genders to escape the links to the abuse and this should also be explored because this to me screams more fight/flight response and isn't healing the issue of abuse that has lead to the gender crisis.

Clearly when TRA's claim we gender critical folk are the reasons trans people commit suicide/self harm or suffer depression they have never bothered to look beyond their own agenda's. I sort of get it. If a number of transpeople do realise their trans label is the wrong one and are dealing with any of those issues you mentioned then it could lead people to think trans isn't really a big issue and not take it seriously enough for those who really have gender dysphoria and if a number of transwomen did really have Transvestic fetishism or autogynaephilia it will be seen as a weird, inappropriate sexual fetish isolating those with actual dysphoria from society. But that alone really gives a strong case for exploring the crisis to begin with before instant labelling and life changing surgeries and hormone therapies and will halt the situation we are in right now where women's rights are being eroded because a few very vocal transwomen (yet to see transmen demand this If I am honest) want access they really shouldn't have.

WorkingItOutAsIGo · 01/09/2016 09:34

This comment is slightly off where the thread has been going, but I've been busy for a couple of days getting DC back to school.

I was hugely disappointed by how MNHQ responded to this issue - and at this point I am not talking about the content. Given the journalistic background of at least some of you, and your social media savviness, to decide to release a wishy-washy statement ignoring most of the discussion, late at night, on an about-to-be-closed thread was shockingly disrespectful to your customers who have spent significant amounts of time having a generally very thoughtful and respectful debate and I think made huge strides in developing understanding. And the sheer unprofessionalism of Kate's comment that she couldn't stay for any further discussion as she had kid stuff to do was appalling to me. As a working mother, actually in working hours, being paid to work, I would never say I cant continue to do my job as I had kids stuff to do. So either poor Kate was writing the response in her holiday time - which begs the question of why there wasn't anyone actually at work to do it - or else she wasn't taking it seriously.

And now, several days later, we still haven't seen anything more from MNHQ - either a more detailed response or any response to the criticisms about how this was done.

The point is - I am not making money from running this site - so its fine for me to take a couple of days off from the debate to deal with kids' stuff. The same does not apply to MNHQ.

Bambambini · 01/09/2016 10:40

Customers? Why not ask for a refund and compensation. Demand that Kate gets a good reprimmand, maybe official warning if not dismissed for unprofessional working paractice. Need to get priorities is order.

WorkingItOutAsIGo · 01/09/2016 10:48

You're right - should have used the word members. The rest is perfectly reasonable.

schbittery · 01/09/2016 10:58

I also find the MN non-response extraordinary, given that the top 3 threads in @site stuff@ at the moment are:

  • worrying about the influence of the TA mobvement on women's rights
  • complaining about all the trans threads on the site
  • complaining about the first thread (of course sensibly turned into more discussion around the topic of the first thread, as you would expect on a site largely populated by women)

I have been told that they have staff members and/or sponsors affiliated with the TA movement so that is no doubt why. Wouldn't bother me on, say, a caravanning forum, but on Mumsnet it's pretty spineless (or appears to be)

ErrolTheDragon · 01/09/2016 12:10

'I don't think exploring all medical/mental health possibilities is 'conversion therapy' its certainly not helpful at all for TRAs insist that's the case.'

Transitioning via hormones/surgery for people who experience a mismatch between their biological sex and 'gender' could be viewed as the ultimate 'conversion therapy'. I don't doubt it's the appropriate course of action for some trans people (transsexuals) but surely not for many other transgender people. There is nothing wrong with your 'gender' not matching your biology because 'gender' is just a load of bloody stereotypes. You should not have to alter your biology to make it fit your 'gender'. You are who you are, a unique individual and if society has a problem with that then it shouldn't be you who has to change.

BeyondASpecialSnowflake · 01/09/2016 12:34

Agree with Working's post. We were told a response would take weeks, there was no need for it to be given sooner but then at 9pm and then not followed up.

PlectrumElectrum · 01/09/2016 12:37

Any chance of an expansion on this -

'I have been told that they [MN] have staff members and/or sponsors affiliated with the TA movement so that is no doubt why.'

If there is any truth to this I'd like to know. It would explain a lot, but Id be surprised/concerned if there are staff affiliated with the TA movement at MN influencing their policy discussions/stance on the trans debate. That's an entirely different picture from that painted earlier - re those in charge being concerned about TRA backlash so fudging their response to hide behind faux concern for hypothetical lurking concerned trans parents, to avoid becoming targets. I'd be pretty surprised if it's true, but any things possible I suppose.

Tbh, all this speculation about who/how/why on MN stance here would be avoided if they'd just engage with us on the issue. The silence from MNHQ while this rages on is unhelpful at best. I think they are genuinely hoping we'll all just fizzle out eventually without having to actually address this in any significant way whatsoever.

FeedMeAndTellMeImPretty · 01/09/2016 13:17

Fruit Cider - I personally have no hatred towards anyone, not even those laughable misogynistic TRA twats who are spouting this nonsense. Hate is too strong a word for how I feel about their ridiculous assertions. I actually think they are twisted and a bit bonkers if they actually believed what they are crowing about.

Not wanting to call myself 'cis' and stating the biological fact that transwomen and women are NOT the same thing isn't hatred, it's just plain common sense.

They remind me of the famous Mythbusters quote "I reject your reality and substitute my own".

I certainly don't think that stating there is no such thing as a female penis = hatred. To say otherwise is ridiculous, not 'inclusive'.

OlennasWimple · 01/09/2016 13:48

I've reported Working's post to bring it to MNHQ's attention, asking whether there will be any further engagement (KateMN's post implied that there would be, after the kids were put to bed Hmm). Suggest others do likewise to prompt them to get on with it?

OP posts:
Prawnofthepatriarchy · 01/09/2016 13:58

MNHQ writes: "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."

Thing is, the internet is alive with support for parents who endorse their child's transition. There are reality TV shows - "I am Jazz" for one - offering wholly uncritical support for transition at younger and younger ages. There are huge resources if you go along with the transition narrative.

It's the parents who are worried about the rights and wrongs of this whole thing that are short on support. There are a few blogs, by de-transitioners and by parents. And of, course, there's youthtranscriticalprofessionals.org/ First, Do No Harm: Youth Trans Critical Professionals Thinking Critically about the Youth Transgender Narrative.

I hope MNHQ looks at this site, sets someone to read its contents (there's not too much to read yet). It's very important that MNHQ realise that the people posting on this blog, these health professionals, are having to blog anonymously because these days failure to go along enthusiastically with the trans agenda wrecks careers. You can lose your job over expressions of even the slightest doubt, even though the current orthodoxy means teenagers are being given off-label drugs and sterilized.

This is how they describe their mission:

We are psychologists, social workers, doctors, medical ethicists, and academics... We are left-leaning, open-minded, and pro-gay rights. However, we are concerned about the current trend to quickly diagnose and affirm young people as transgender, often setting them down a path toward medical transition.

Our concern is with medical transition for children and youth. We feel that unnecessary surgeries and/or hormonal treatments which have not been proven safe in the long-term represent significant risks for young people. Policies that encourage — either directly or indirectly — such medical treatment for young people who may not be able to evaluate the risks and benefits are highly suspect, in our opinion.

Medical transition can involve administering puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to young children. These drugs are being used off-label. The long term side effects are not known, but there is cause for concern. They can certainly result in permanent sterilization of a child who has not even been allowed to go through puberty. In essence, the rush to treat transgender children medically is a massive experiment. For the young person who has never lived as their own sex in their own body, surgical intervention may seem like the next logical step. Young people can undergo such treatment without parental permission once they are eighteen years old. In these surgeries, healthy organs are removed.

We are alarmed by the trend among mental health professionals to affirm a young person’s self diagnosis as transgender with minimal exploration. In many cases, these young people come to identify as trans after binges on social media sites such as tumblr, reddit, or YouTube. There is evidence that social contagion may be at play. In many schools and communities, there are entire peer groups “coming out” as trans at the same time.

For such a self-diagnosed young person, the next stop is often a therapist’s office. In several states, there is now legislation on the books forbidding therapists to engage in conversion therapy. While the sentiment behind this legislation is laudable, in some cases, it is being interpreted to mean that therapists cannot explore gender identity with a youth who is professing to be trans. This would mean we can’t ask why; we can’t explore underlying mental health issues; we can’t consider the symbolic nature of the gender dysphoria; and we can’t look at possible confounding issues such as social media use or social contagion.

It is time that mental health and other professionals begin speaking out on this issue.

Thing is, people think medicine is all science, but there are fashions in medicine just like in anything else - and they can do a lot of damage. Initiating medical treatment with a side effect of sterilizing children is a huge deal, and normally only considered if potentially life-limiting illness is involved.

I remember the Satanic abuse scandal, a moral panic that originated in the US in the 1990s but spread to the UK - see the Orkney child abuse scandal. Innocent families were torn apart and hundreds of children removed from their parents due to a sudden explosion of uncritical belief, particularly among social workers, that there was a hidden but significant population of children being raped, even murdered, by Satanist groups. This belief took hold very thoroughly, and went on doing its damage almost uncontested for years until it fizzled out. No single provable case of the Satanic abuse they sought was ever found. But at the time pretty much everyone believed in it, or seemed to.

There have been other fashions in medicine/social work concerning children and young adults. Anyone else remember the epidemic of False Memory syndrome, developed and encouraged by unscrupulous therapists? That too was debunked, but only after it had done its damage to the innocent. And of course there was the horrifying anal dilation business in Cleveland which caused irreparable damage to the children and families involved.

Trans activists try to shut down debate with everything in their power, and one of the arguments they use is that "you don't want to be on the wrong side of history."

Well, I'd argue that by creating a safe space for parents to critically analyse what the trans agenda is doing to their kids, that MNHQ is going to be on precisely the right side of history. The whole toxic mess will explode in the not-too-distant future, with young adults de-transitioning, scandals and law suits. Whatever the motives, transing children can only be considered wildly irresponsible, and this will eventually come out.

In the meantime, many parents are desperate for support and MN is ideally placed to provide it. I'm sure no one would insult or try to hurt questioning parents, but outspoken help is precisely what so many need. Check out the replies on 4th Wave Now, a community of parents & friends skeptical of the "transgender child/teen" trend. Pretty much every post that appears is answered by several parents who have just found the blog, expressing their huge relief and gratitude that there's a place where the trans agenda is being held up to scrutiny.