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.

Wake up @MNHQ women's rights have been declared to be anti-trans.
You must remove all discussion of women's rights if you want to stop the transgender advocates from harassing you.
p.s. They won't stop now that they see blood in the water.

Yy

Define those simple biological terms then refer people back to those terms in subsequent posts. You may have to post those terms everyday, but the chances are that most people will know what those terms mean by default without you having to repost, those terms, again. But for some, you can refer them back to those terms.

You can also save those terms in a simple text form, to be copied and pasted for those who have problems with biology.

And for reference. Those terms are male, female, man, woman

Just catching up with this. Wholeheartedly agree with comments asking where are the trans men in all this? Why are these people socialised as female not shouting from the rooftops about their rights and seeking to control the language that others use? Oh, wait....

I'm not comfortable with the idea of a specific 'trans rights sex and gender moderation policy' - surely MN has weathered enough controversial storms to be able to use its usual procedures? Who are these people putting pressure of women to change their language and/or shut up? Oh, wait.....

I do agree with not tolerating anymore abuse or moderators or attempts to silence by mass reporting of posts, but don't know why 'trans rights sex and gender' have to be singled out - this should be a blanket policy.

I did die a little inside when I saw reference to 'trans rights' in MNHQs opening post, with no reference to women's rights which was where Justine's emphasis had been in her previous statement.

This is scary and depressing.

I think of MNHQ as rather like Chamberlain at this unfortunate juncture in Europe history:

I'm finding all the "Please Master, just tell me the words I'm allowed, I'll say whatever you want, just don't gag me again" a bit, you know. Depressing.

I was posting this kind of stuff to highlight that this policy isn't as neutral as it sounds - more we're removing all the terms you could use instead of woman so you're going to have to say woman, suckers.

I would very much like a suggestion from MNHQ as to what terms are acceptable for male trans people that do not appropriate terminology from the female sex under this new policy.

If there aren't any, I think we should know.

Also:

MNHQ - if you ban thebewilderness, you might start a riot. Jus' sayin'.

Ohm and before anyone, and that includes MNHQ gets in my case and says I'm saying trans rights activists are Nazis, it's a metaphor.

MNHQ bend over backwards in the attempt to come up with a policy that will seem as neutral as possible and still get called out for not silencing one side only.

You can't create a compromise when one side has already decided that they will only accept unconditional surrender.

oh I so agree... and this - WHERE WERE THE WOMEN?????

I did die a little inside when I saw reference to 'trans rights' in MNHQs opening post, with no reference to women's rights which was where Justine's emphasis had been in her previous statement.

This is scary and depressing.

What is wrong (from either "side") with the terms transwoman and transman?

Sigh.

Can I still refer to myself as a TIM? Because that is how I describe myself now.

Though I must admit I do like TIXY

TIXY is quite cute, but, you know, it isn't complete surrender, so...

Perhaps we can just keep things simple and scientific and biological?

That is, we can refer to transwomen as "male" and transmen as "female".

Why on earth would that pose a problem when MNHQ have clearly stated that they are, of course, OK with people talking in a scientific and or biological manner.

So, for example, a gender critical poster could talk about a "male trans person" in the place of the deemed unacceptable acronym "TIM". "Male trans person" would be scientifically and biologicaly correct.

Problem solved, no?

How about some kind of ‘symbol’ to discuss MtF trans people, a bit like Prince.

*I did die a little inside when I saw reference to 'trans rights' in MNHQs opening post, with no reference to women's rights which was where Justine's emphasis had been in her previous statement.

This is scary and depressing.*

Agree completely.

On a side note I rather like TIXY but it does put me in mind of Tixylix...good thing or bad thing?

I can live with the terms 'transwoman' and 'transman'.

A seahorse isn't a horse.
A snapdragon isn't a dragon.

A word can be joined to another to produce a new noun meaning something different.

*I did die a little inside when I saw reference to 'trans rights' in MNHQs opening post, with no reference to women's rights which was where Justine's emphasis had been in her previous statement.

This is scary and depressing.*

I noticed this too. It all feels really sinister

Beachcomber
OFF TO GULAG

What is wrong (from either "side") with the terms transwoman and transman?

That would be my preferred outcome. Whilst some will prefer to separate the "trans" and "man" with a space, I appreciate others may have an ideological aversion to this. In practice I alternate between the two depending on who I'm talking to so as to cause least friction, and mostly I hope everyone takes the space (or lack of it) as a mark of my good faith, not necessarily my opinion.

Oh please let a snap dragon be a dragon❤️😭

A trans man is female. Works for me.

A word can be joined to another to produce a new noun meaning something different.

YY! Could we be edging closer...?