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.

So...

"A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing anatomical structure, or other attributes of sex such as with hormone therapy."

screen shotting and requesting mass reporting and you’ll get the regulars picked off

That is what is going to happen Bowl.
Maybe that is what the new rules are about?

I am concerned that posters are being censured for speaking the truth tbh.

TIM or Trans Identified Male is the factual truth of a XY male bodied person identifying as a transperson.

I am also happy to be known as a TERF as this is factually correct, I am a trans exclusionary radical feminist.

I find the term cis-woman annoying because I am just a biological woman and there is no need for a prefix. But I am not offended by someone calling me cis and I personally see no need for this term to be banned purely for being superfluous and irritating.

Another thanks from me Justine for being brave enough to host this debate when so many others have been bullied out of it.

Just want to say again - three strikes rules can't work unless users know whether they are on zero, one, or two strikes. Please, Justine, address this vital point.

I don't like it either LaSqrrl but I'm not calling male people women.

Think I'll just stick to saying 'trans person who was formerly considered male/female prior to social or surgical transisition'. Or something.

Whatever I settle on, I think I will have to create a sticky key so that I don't have to type it out every time.

One thing I do know. All of this is nothing if not a huge pain in the arse.

Think I'll just stick to saying 'trans person who was formerly considered male/female prior to social or surgical transisition'

LOL, comments on FWR are going to be very very long!

Section 212(1) of Equality Act

“Woman” means a female of any age.

So only females are women. Transwomen are not females so they are not women. That’s our statute.

It's certainly an interesting point in time when we are told that a company will "allow" people to discuss biology and science.

Indeed.

That said, it’s clear that most trans people find the use of pronouns, or names that they or others have consciously rejected, to be hurtful and would therefore struggle to engage in a discussion with those who insist on using them.

Nothing will compel me to refer to a male person as female. Ever.

"A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing anatomical structure, or other attributes of sex such as with hormone therapy."

No. If you read the example in the Explanatory Notes you will see that entirely social things are aspects of sex in EA 2010

Thanks to MN for the massive financial and personal investment in free speech, with such questionable PR returns. You've gone above and beyond.

Aha - Transperson amab/afab

Can't complain if we are using their own wording, can they...

three strikes rules can't work unless users know whether they are on zero, one, or two strikes

True, and it does not help that no reason is given in the deleted comment, nor any PM to advise that a comment has been deleted. So if they are going to do this properly, and fairly, they just made a whole lot of work for themselves.

I suspect this could be a way to get rid of most of the GC posters. An easier way, just delete the entire FWR board. Why not? If that is the aim.

Theres a hell of a lot of questions being thrown at MNHQ here so can we just take a moment to say ThankYou to the whole moderation team for endlessly ploughing through this minefield.

Even the Equalities Act isnt clear, so its bloody hard to follow at times but on the whole you are doing a great job.

and much deserved

I appreciate MNHQ trying to find clarity in this. But it is minefield.

I've realised there is no making sense of it - things do not add up either biologically or logically and it changes and evolves all the time.

This weekend my youngest and their partner came to visit. This time last year they were 2 young women who identified as female and used their birth names. They have now both changed their names and their 'genders' - though this seems to be confused with 'sex'.

My child describes themselves as Non-Binary Trans, is about to start Testosterone injections and wants a double mastectomy. My child's pronouns are they or he - either will do apparently. However they don't identify as either male or female.

So presumably they don't want to be referred to as a transman - though if pushed would prefer to be 'seen' as male.

The partner is Non-binary but is not intending on having any hormones or surgery. Their pronoun is they.

Both look female. Both display female 'traits' which my son has never displayed - even allowing for socialisation. To all observers they are a lesbian couple. Only they're 'not'.

It's all about feelings. Gender is entirely personal and based on how you feel - so there are as many genders as there are individual people.

As I said it's a minefield and a constantly evolving one at that.

None of us should set out on here to be offensive or hurtful or use terms that cause problems - but we are heading (if not there already) into a topsy turvy place where language and truth cease to have relevance or meaning.

Making it almost impossible to approach this rationally with fairness and consideration for all.

"entirely social things are aspects of sex in EA 2010"

Well, I did say it had clearly not been written by someone with knowledge of biology.

Can't complain if we are using their own wording, can they...

Actually Beyond, it was OUR acronyms originally, but FAB/MAB, none of the 'A' at the beginning, they tacked that on.

Shh, la

I mostly lurk unspoken as other posters say it better than I could .. but must admit it was me who reported most of daims posts, i report any post that I think Is anti woman , anti femail or goady . Biology is fact set in stone and cannot be argued with .
Tra ( sorry shorter!) have been mass reporting Gc posts so this is my little rebellion.

Sorry female...😊

I will be using biolocally male trans person. Or biolocally female trans person.

I do hope we will still be allowed to use correct scientific terms.

I sympathise with you anchormum. These girls are lesbians who have become convinced by social media that there is something wrong with being lesbians, so they must be something else.

In ye olden days they would have worn Doc Martens and black eyeliner and hung around with a mixed group of youngsters of all ages/sexes/orientations who would have worn everything from suits to miniskirts. It would have been experimental and fluid and fun. Nowadays they have to pick a box, climb into it and (if they have medical treatment) stay in that box for the rest of their lives. It's so sad.

Still don't know what's wrong with 'trans XY'. Harrumph.

"Well, I did say it had clearly not been written by someone with knowledge of biology."

Yes. It's a mess, isn't it?

A transwoman has protected characteristic of gender reassignment. A gender reassigned male (biological sex term). So a “GRM” a transman is a “GRF”

I'm going to use gender reassigned male. As per the EA2010 as Ellletorro has pointed out.

Or transperson if the context has already been set.