Mumsnet moderation of trans rights and gender critical issues

[JustineMumsnet]

Hi all,
We've given lots of thought to our moderation policies around trans rights and sex and gender issues and thought it would be a good idea to articulate where we stand in the form of a clear statement, so everyone can be clear about our moderation going forward. You can find it here. Hope it provides a helpful reference point. Thanks.

I was going to post this - below - a couple of hours ago - but my daughter came home, and since then so much has happened on here....

I don't believe Mumsnet means they won't accept discussion of genitals - it is absolutely why organisations like Man Friday were set up - to STOP penises appearing in female spaces....... I trust to Mumsnet reflection and wisdom, but it has taken a knocking having read this thread.........

SO MY EARLIER UNPOSTED POST _ Firstly to Mumsnet for hosting us - and hosting us so thoughtfully

I think it is great that there is now clearer guidance and trust Mumsnet to ensure it is properly implemented - they are not going to ban people for an accidental slip of the typewriter, and are clear that it is the spirit of the post that matters most. It is also great that they are really clear they will come down on multiple vexatious reporters.

That said I am a bit concerned about the bias towards trans people - that it is seen as a discussion of trans rights rather than of both trans rights and female rights......that women and girls were not mentioned:

*2. We don’t allow posts which are derogatory or aggressive towards trans people. We believe there are ways to express both opinion and facts without crossing this line.

That's fine but could we please add in "we don't allow posts which are derogatory or aggressive towards women and girls" as well? Or indeed just stop at we don't allow posts which are derogatory or aggressive Otherwise it does appear that transpeople are getting special treatment and, by omission, that it's fine to be derogatory and aggressive to other groups of people, which presumably is not your intent?*

This is a very important point - it is the one thing that glared out at me from an otherwise balanced and well-thought through statement. Well, that and the fact that transgender was regarded as oppressed while women and girls weren't.

I don't think we should get our knickers in a twist about Cis and Terf.... I am sure what they mean is we cannot describe people as such, but can discuss the implications.... e.g. So many banners were out claiming all Terfs must die (or Im worried about how Cis is creeping into language).... but not accusing someone on this board of being a terf ...or talking about Cis Women as a group. FOR WHICH I AM GRATEFUL - I FIND IT HUGELY DEROGATORY TO BE TALKED ABOUT AS A CIS WOMAN

Equally, I think - and hope - that when they said that transpeople find it difficult to engage in a discussion which includes names/genders they have left behind, that they meant we shouldn't be engaging with people on this forum in this way i.e. personalising it in a derogatory way (though fine to explore personal stories as has occasionally happened)...... But I believe, and will be very shocked if I am wrong, that they think it is acceptable (as happens in the media) to talk about someone in the public eye by their current name and their previous name, to talk of their history and what they have done and not just pretend they were born afresh aged 36 with a new female name and no history.

Ditto discussing the two male-bodied humans who won the girls' race.... (Help - already wondered if I can write boys there... surely I can???? But wondering....)

I'm also really hoping that they've got some great moderating management - it isn't going to be easy if the TRAs are gunning for us - I know that Mumsnet is wise to that and will notice that it is the GC posts that are being reported (on a FEMINIST site) and be light touch in their response. I also hear the worrying comments that some moderators are a bit "woke" but I suspect like all good organisations they have a way of "spot-checking" moderators' decisions to check they are still in line with organisational approach.

AND ANOTHER VOTE FOR NOT TOUCHING ON WORD ON THE TRANS-WIDOWS THREADS.... these are a precious support mechanism for people's experiences that must not be invalidated.... if Mumsnet really does mean it supports oppressed minorities, this is a group that more than qualifies..... and it is important that it is there for others to read and understand the impact on families

Are we allowed to say that this is doubleplusungood? Seems to suit the diktat.

Right, can we have a Trans issues board now, and it can all be in one place?

This is what Mumsnet said in 2014

Ultimately, we think one of the real strengths of MN is that it allows users to have robust disagreements about difficult topics, but without hate speech, and without comments that are just plain mean or personally directed at other posters. If there are any posts that you think we need to look at please flag them up by hitting the 'Report' button and we'll always take a look.

Refusing to accept the identity of trans people is mean. The latest Mumsnet editorial policy doesn't look all that new to me, it just spells it out in more detail. What matters is that LGBTIQ Mumsneters can use the site without experiencing hostility and that cannot mean that it is OK to question their identity. And yes, I do believe that telling a woman she is a man is both transphobia (which is banned on Mumsnet) and hate speech.

Gibberty

You say its an insult to call men who live their lives as women ‘males’.

Well I say
It is an insult for any person born male to opt themselves into womanhood.

There is a new Spartacus thread, it's been up for nearly an hour. I doubt it will last much longer.
Will everyone who comments on deleted threads be on one strike? What if they have more than one post on a deleted thread?
I can see a lot of us getting suspended quite quickly if that's the case. Bearing in mind the cake thread got deleted.

WTF is it with you that you constantly claim your beliefs trump everyone else beliefs, GibbertyFlibbert .
Do you understand how authoritarian your positions are?

Rather sad.... I did like Tixy.... I'll look forward to hearing what word we can use that doesn't include woman.... and I do think it needs to be a real word.... It is not so long ago that I was new to these issues and one of the most alienating things was all the acronyms.....

If we want to exclude people - fine - but to be a friendly inclusive board we need to use real accessible language that doesn't frighten people off or make them feel like they don't belong

So no TIM or TIF. Right. Well I'll be using MTF and FTM, or MtT and FtT. These are the acronyms that medical professionals use.

So Lily Madigan is no longer a TIM, but a MtT. As are Jane, Tara, Munroe et al.

It doesn't roll of the tongue as easily, but I've found pronouncing it "Mutt" and "Futt" helps.

That's fine. I can cope with that (and as it's a known medical term, I don't see how anyone can complain)

I will never last six weeks without being deleted repeatedly for saying something a transgender advocate does not get deleted for.
Does saying so qualify as being rude to the mods?

WTF is it with you that you constantly claim your beliefs trump everyone else beliefs,

More that their beliefs don't trump everyone elses facts

I think it is an excellent idea for MN to create a Male plank where the MRAs and transgender advocates can be sent when they try to make Feminism all about males instead of women's rights.

Refusing to accept the lived reality of women and girls as different to that of people 'assigned male at birth' is mean, ignorant and oppressive to women and our rights.

What matters is that LGBTIQ Mumsneters can use the site without experiencing hostility and that cannot mean that it is OK to question their identity.

Two points here:

Firstly lesbianism/homosexuality/bisexuality is a sexual orientation not an identity

And secondy,lesbians are feeling and expressing that they are directly under threat from this. The cotton ceiling. The denial that a lesbian can exclude a class of people with penises and must take each one as an individual and give them a fair shot. That’s not good for lesbians is it? Lesbians are telling us, on this thread and others that they’re under attack.

There is a lot about this ideology that is homophobic imo. Latching it on to LGB is good PR for the other letters, but let’s not pretend it’s in the name of inclusivity. It looks more like a takeover.

Latching it on to LGB is good PR for the other letters, but let’s not pretend it’s in the name of inclusivity.

I don't think the I's are particularly chuffed at how it's going either tbh.

So no TIM or TIF. Right. Well I'll be using MTF and FTM, or MtT and FtT. These are the acronyms that medical professionals use.

If that is the agreed on acronyms I suggest you brace for impact because there is going to be a narcissistic ragegasm erupting as soon as we use these terms.

Also, with regards to ‘misgendering’ being ‘mean’-

Men are trying to identify themselves into female only spaces with no care about the females that don’t want them in there, men are trying to coerce lesbians into having sex with them, men are taking spots in politics which were designed to address lack of female representation, men are trampling over the hard won rights of women and we shouldn’t be ‘mean’ to them?

Fuck that.

Well said BowlofBabelfish. 👏

Yes - my bad. Intersex people are being dragged into this entire thing as treated like a ‘gotcha!’ Freak show. It’s disgraceful. Intersex is neither an identity nor an orientation - and it’s not OK to use intersex people as a pawn in this.

There is no legal requirement to accept someones gender identity.

The phrase accept someone's gender identity does not even have a meaning in plain English.

It is word salad.

Just want to point out I'm a lesbian and have had more hostility on this board than any other place on the Internet.
I would like to be able to use this forum as a lesbian without the constant goady posts saying I must love lady penis if I support and respect trans people.

How about just using the terms that individuals have said they wished to be referred by? Respecting people's identities?

So we should accept Rachel Dolezal as black?

We should accept Chloe Jennings-White as paraplegic?

And will MNHQ delete us if we suggest that Dolezal is white, and Jennings-White has full use of her limbs?