MNHQ - where is the line in the sand on comments about trans people?

[yetanothertranswoman]

Or does anything go?

Do you have a line in the sand about comments people can make? How do you decide if comments go too far?

There are plenty of things that get deleted on MN about other groups. Plenty of controversial opinions. But trans people seem to be a group where almost anything goes.

How do you decide where the line is?

What would not be tolerated?

Well, if you e.g. look at the “are straight men breaking the law,” thread, it is full of absolutely awful hateful postings. Similarly the numerous petition threads (why does there need to be more than one anyway?)

Most people don’t want to read the trans threads anyway and as people say, if you don’t want to read them then click away, but that doesn’t then follow with the idea of reporting individual posts does it? Because to report individual posts you have to keep reading the thread, which means that ultimately people stop reading the threads apart from the transphobes, because everyone else is shouted down, and posts are thus not reported.

You don't need to post to report the threads. And if you're prepared to post in site stuff and discuss how transphobic the site is, it's a little disappointing that you're not prepared to help moderate the site. MNHQ only look at what's reported to them. If you don't want to report stuff then nothing will change and it is pointless to complain about it.

And presumably you've reported at least one of the hateful posts on that thread, and MNHQ have not deleted them for you?

I have read racist stuff on mn, so I would say that it is tolerated to a certain extent.

But as you say, I hardly ever report it, just stop reading/hide the thread.

I've just scanned a tabloid that read 'killer junkie out in a frock'....... I presume its about the transgender man who stabbed his victim 66 times???? Is that past the line??

And this is the problem with topics which take over the boards. Those who feel passionately about said topic tell those who don’t “well, if you don’t like it then don’t read it.” Fair enough. I don’t read the trans threads as a general rule. But then if you tell the people who disagree with the ethos of a subject not to read and they don’t, then that subject becomes a free-for-all where anyone posting seems to feel permitted to post any comment they wish, and because MN rely on reports, if the people who don’t want to read stop reading then nobody is going to be reporting.

I absolutely agree that on the whole MN HQ rely on reports to be able to know whether abusive/offensive posts are being written, and that as a general rule they cannot police every thread. However when a particular topic takes up so much of the boards that numerous posts a day are being posted on that topic, and posts are being posted about posts on the topic, then HQ need to be a bit more on the ball and where possible contain those posts to a place where they are in a position to be able to police them better if necessary.

There needs to be a trans topic, that way the people being told not to read don’t need to see the threads because they can hide the topic. If need be they can report threads which appear in aibu and those threads can be moved there.

We are way, way beyond the point where a few obsessed individuals feel that people need educating on the matter, and have reached beyond saturation point to a place where people would rather click past than read yet another anti trans thread.

We’ve had this in the past re e.g. elections, high profile news stories, brexit (in fact brexit is a case in point as it did gain its own topic for exactly those reasons,) but usually those types of threads dominate the boards for a few days maybe weeks. This one has been dominating and getting progressively worse for over a year now.

AssassinatedBeauty I reported the whole thread last night. I have no inclination to keep going back there to see whether there are more individual posts I wish to disagree with. As you say, if I don’t like the thread then I shouldn’t be reading it, but that contradicts what you’re saying about needing to read it so I can report individual threads.

I think we are misunderstanding each other @SpartacusAutisticus

If we were friends, and we were walking in the park and I sat on
that wet paint bench, you'd be quite right to to call me a wally for reading the signs and still sitting my bum on wet paint! That's not cruel or nasty, it's just acknowledging daft or inept behaviour with a friend. You must have a word you use, even to yourself if you do something a bit daft (I do plenty of wally-ish things all the time!)

At no point did I suggest or mean that I would use terms such as you listed to describe someone with an intellectual disability, or as a term of cruelty or spite. I'm sorry if that's how it came across.

Did you get a response yet from MNHQ? I find you get a response much much quicker if you report in the day time, working hours pretty much. Stuff that gets reported late at night I think sometimes goes to the back of the pile and doesn't get looked at for a while.

Regarding contradictions, yes of course it's impossible to report what you haven't read. But you seem to be reading anyway and getting cross enough to post here, so if it is such a big problem maybe there's room for some proactive posting from those who don't see themselves as transphobic to try and crack down on what is posted.

You'd like all threads that are at all about anything to do with trans removed from all other boards and placed in one section only? But they would still appear in Active threads. Maybe you could ask MNHQ to not allow any threads about trans activism and issues to appear in Active either, which would seem necessary for your "higher level" moderation to work. Although, do topics you've hidden not show up in your Active list? Not sure how that works.

I have been following the trans threads on MN more or less regularly since they first started. The guideline seems to be:

Anything about biological facts and dictionary definitions = No problem. That means, we can say:

• transwomen are male, as per dictionary definition of the word ("Of the sex that can make sperm") and not female, again as per the dictionary definition ("Of the sex that can make eggs of bear young")
• transwomen are not women, as per dictionary definition of the word (="Adult human female", since they are not female as per above definition).

Also anything that stems from the above definitions and biological facts are allowed, such as: transwomen are not women therefore should not be sent to women's prisons, penis is not a female organ, etc.

Anything showing prejudice against trans people = Problem . That is what transphobia actually means. So people are not be allowed to say:

• transwomen are freaks/unnatural/horrible/disgusting etc
• It's reasonable to not hire/be friends with/have a relationship with a transwomen

I'm as gender critical as they come and partake in threads about self ID etc but some of the posts on the 'straight men' thread were horrid. It is possible to say you wouldn't find a specific group of people sexually attractive without gratuitously stating just how disgusting you find them/ how the thought makes you physically ill etc.

We are way, way beyond the point where a few obsessed individuals feel that people need educating on the matter, and have reached beyond saturation point to a place where people would rather click past than read yet another anti trans thread.

I don't think we are "way, way beyond" because some people (mentioning no names) still don't seem to understand the issue. The issue is not 'trans' or 'anti-trans', the issue is 'self ID'.

No they wouldn’t appear in active because anyone who didn’t want to read about trans could simply hide the entire topic.

I’m not sure whether the straight men topic has been removed now but it was absolutely beyond the pale and disgusting. Anyone who thinks that level of posting is acceptable on any topic is out of order.

It’s perfectly fine to say that you wouldn’t want a relationship with a trans person, I wouldn’t neither would I want a relationship with a bisexual, although funnily enough I was told I was homophobic for that one. But it’s a whole different matter when you start making reference to appearance, disgust and so on.

@SpartacusAutisticus But that is the point (for me) Shots, if you wouldn't use it towards a person with an intellectual disability you're acknowledging that it is offensive.

No, I meant I wouldn't call someone with an intellectual disability stupid for not reading/understanding a sign etc. I might jokingly call them "bigfoot" if they kept tripping over their own feet or something (again, I am clumsy enough to do this a lot more than I'd like!), but I wouldn't be mean about their disability. I accept that some people do maintain the link between the "old" use of the words, but there is a growing number of people who have no idea of the previous link and use them as I have, which is absolutely not to cast a slur in that "old" way (which I think must be good?).

I tend to use body part words for exclamation, arse/arses/arsehole is nicely universal, with an occasional twat or pillock. There's plenty of words to use, removing a few with unpleasant connotations really isn't that hard.
Yes - "Pillock" is underused, I might take your tip and bring it back into my vocab!

Thanks for taking the time to respond

Obviously you want the MN line and everyone's to be where YOU say it is OP. There are some close to the knuckle comments on here and they are deleted swiftly. Anything else that stands is general gender critical discussion, and this is one of the few places, THANKFULLY, it's allowed to stand.

Would you expect MNHQ to proactively check the Active thread lists to see if any trans discussions come up, and move them out of the way asap? Or rely on posters like yourself to have to report them as trans related and request a move?

I would still expect posters to report threads so they could be moved after all all manner of people use e.g. aibu “for traffic” so a lot of what is in aibu doesn’t necessarily belong there already...

Posts within the posts though I would imagine that if someone like me who doesn’t want to read trans threads saw that they were in the trans topic they wouldn’t be reading them or would even have the topic hidden, however if someone was reading the threads one could assume they were doing so knowingly and should report offensive posts, although there’s always a chance a lot more would be allowed to slide

Obviously you want the MN line and everyone's to be where YOU say it is OP. There are some close to the knuckle comments on here and they are deleted swiftly. Anything else that stands is general gender critical discussion, and this is one of the few places, THANKFULLY, it's allowed to stand

Not really. I am surprised, like others, that MNHQ want MN to be associated with some of the comments on the straight men thread.

If people haven't read it yet - maybe they should.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3204467-to-wonder-if-all-straight-men-could-be-committing-a-hate-crime?

I haven't read or contributed to that thread. You have at least read it, you must surely have reported the posts that concern you? To complain about the system without making use of it seems a bit unfair. If you're reporting stuff that's transphobic and it's not being removed by MNHQ then that's worth complaining about.

You have at least read it, you must surely have reported the posts that concern you. To complain about the system without making use of it seems a bit unfair

Yes - I have reported posts. But they still stayed up. So MNHQ didn't feel they crossed any line.

What was the response you got from MNHQ? Just that the posts aren't transphobic in their view?

If you're reporting stuff that's transphobic and it's not being removed by MNHQ then that's worth complaining about

The posts aren't transphobic. It's not transphobic to not want to have sex with a transwoman. But some of the posts on that thread might wll be not be like this:

We think, on any topic to be honest, that if people post with genuine intention and in a civil way, that's usually enough to keep things pleasant for everyone

Maybe MNHQ does.