Mumsnet moderation - response to yesterday's feedback

[JustineMumsnet]

Hi all,

I’ve had lots of contact about about yesterday’s thread which has now maxed out so thought I’d put a response here.

First of all our guidelines absolutely do allow people to discuss biology and science. And we absolutely see why some of Penny Mordaunt’s words yesterday would raise concerns amongst those with a gender critical POV - so maybe it wasn’t, in retrospect, the best moment to make a point. Nonetheless we do believe that as a rule Spartacus-type threads are not conducive to a constructive debate and that trans people would be likely to feel attacked and/or excluded by them.

To state the obvious and as I’ve said before, this is an extremely polarised debate in which even the most basic terms are disputed, so if we’re going to have it here we’re in danger of being attacked from all sides (which we are in actual fact). Nonetheless, we think it’s important, so we’ll keep at it and we’ll keep trying to moderate it to make it as open and civil as we possibly can.

You should also know that I’m due to meet soon with Penny Mordaunt to discuss “any ideas you may have on the women and equalities agenda’' and I will of course reflect the strong opinion of many Mumsnetters wrt to this issue and ask her to do a webchat too.

Thanks, as ever, for your input.

I think you're wrong.

I'm not.
It was flippant and poorly judged.

MN is being talked about by various groups because there are lots of women who are pissed. MN has been a place where a lot of questions and active concern about proposals has been voiced.

Justine would not even be having a conversation with Penny but for that.

Justine should really know why and be able to reasonably make a comment on the subject without coming across as badly as that. If she's going to make the same mistake to those in power, it could really have consequences and lose a huge opportunity for all with a vested interest.

Which part of this do you find difficult to understand?

The bit where you don't like people not just rolling over and not sucking up to Justine when they have very big concerns over an issue that affects them directly?

Making a law will not create acceptance, especially if its done against public opinion. It will just create a judging dislike and active hostility.

If people fail to understand this, there are some very real consequences for both vulnerable women and trans people.

Being in the situation I am, I'd really rather that didn't come to pass. But people like you are hell bent on making it happen.

You know those massive posts by TRA. Who reads them.

I don't.

oppression olympics: can only be played by the feminist side to dismiss any unpopular view on the grounds of privilege. If the opposing side responds to say how bloody ridiculous, remind them this is not the oppression olympics. Even though oppression wasn't mentioned until privilege was mentioned...both by the feminist side. Bonkers.

tugging your forelock: don't bother. I don't think she expects as much as a civil thanks from you all at this point.

A woman disagrees with the feminists....what do you mean by woman? Me. I mean myself. I'm a woman. And I don't have to prove that to anyone or define it to anyone to make it true. I don't give a shit that you would like to have that discussion again. Having read a fair portion of the endless screeds by the feminists here have to say on that topic, I have to say I find your views interesting, worthwhile but ultimately, not the only views with merit. But well done for avoiding my points as much as I've avoided yours. The difference is you have been discussing your points for months - mine would have been a new venture for you.

prawn Again, one unpleasant line and you withdraw to imaginary applause. You're not that pithy. A wall of text might be expanding.

Again, I'm not saying I think you're wrong in all that you're saying. But I do have a problem with you thinking any woman who doesn't agree with you is wrong and is less worthy of being listened to as a female voice. When it comes right down to it, its not just trans women you would disqualify from womanhood if you could. You have been trying to silence women who aren't in alignment with you for quite a while now. That is a problem I hope Justine raises with Penny.

Feminism, the political movement for the liberation of women, and the Feminists who practice Feminism here on the Feminism and Women's Rights board of Mumsnet think women who disagree with them are wrong and they say so.
They would be hypocrites if they did not.

You do not have the political corner or the media corner.

kitchenrollinrollinrollin

This statement of yours is true and therein is the central issue.

Sorry I'm not being pleasant enough for you, Kitchen. Memo to self: must work on my female socialization.

Accusing Feminists of thought crime is unlikely to add credibility to your judgments.

TBF Pratchet, I'm hardly the right person to one to criticise someone for a wall of text! People are gracious enough to read some of mine.

I try and make an effort for that reason.

As a rule, its easier to argue against someone making long posts; there more to pick apart.

Its harder to make a really powerful point and cover multiple aspects of a complex argument in just a few short lines.

And I'd rather not reduce 'debate' to 240 characters either. Twitter facilitates and encourages thought ending cliches rather than thoughtful consideration. Its the platform's weakness.

If the opposing side responds to say how bloody ridiculous

Who is constituting the opposing side to feminists?

'..what do you mean by woman?'

Me. I mean myself. I'm a woman

Did someone mention narcissism

Red: yours aren't word salad. Each point has cogency. These are just word tsunamis to try to bore us into giving up.

Kitchen, you really struggle with metaphor don't you? Referencing a metaphoric crucifixion in the context of a Spartacus reference is pointing out that all those who claim the name risk the same treatment. An 'I am Spartacus' thread is the antithesis of self-involvement, so how you made the leap to that particular cheap shot is beyond me.
As for the 'Mansplaining', there are indicators in tone, content and verbosity, alongside an assumption of superiority. If you want to engage in debate and change hearts and minds, giving the impression that you believe those you are engaging with are stupid is not going to work. You may not be a man but you have picked up one of their more unsavoury habits. Nekulturniy working class women like me get the 'mansplaining' a lot from middle-class women as much as we do from men. Maybe I have a chip on my shoulder from a lifetime of being patronised on the basis of my socioeconomic background and lack of wealth, but hey, in the lexicon of trans-activism, being patronised by the privileged 'denies my existence and is triggering, like, literal violence' - now if I could say that without laughing, the snide comment about being self-involved would be spot on.
Prove to me that women will not be affected negatively in any way by self-identification and I for one would be willing to negotiate. But you can't do that can you? None of the trans-activists or their supporters have been able to - the response is usually to shout 'TERF' just because the question has been asked. By making law based on individualist identity politics we risk making speaking truth and stating biological reality 'hate speech'. That idea terrifies me. I want to remind people that 'Handmaid's Tale' is a work of dystopian fiction and intended as a warning, it is not an instruction manual.

can only be played by the feminist side to dismiss any unpopular view on the grounds of privilege. If the opposing side responds to say how bloody ridiculous, remind them this is not the oppression olympics. Even though oppression wasn't mentioned until privilege was mentioned...both by the feminist side. Bonkers.

It should always be the most vulnerable person in any situation. Some times this is a trans person. Sometimes its a woman.

The whole thing about Self ID and the debate around it is based on the premise that trans people are always the most oppressed and that all women have privilege over them on the basis that they are not trans.

Gender critical feminists do not agree with this position. They might disagree on other points but thats one you'll find almost universal agreement on.

Thus Justine's flippant comment, which seemed to reflect that former view, and is completely at odds with one of the fundmental points that is producing concern - about the framework of safeguarding structures - which primarily protect women and children but also in some circumstances also offer protection to trans people and thus is deeply problematic and concerning.

It misses one of the biggest points women are trying to make.

It was something that could not just be ignored and not picked up on.

Part of the point that women are saying is that, the concern is that men who are in no way trans will exploit the law for trans people for nepharious purposes at the ultimate expense of women AND trans people.

In playing 'oppression olympics' everyone loses sight of why those frameworks were set up to begin with. The history is important as it exposes the problems that existed in the past, and might well arise again unless due consideration and proper thought is given as to how you continue to make sure safeguarding works going forward.

These are just word tsunamis to try to bore us into giving up.

I read Hansard and medical journals by choice, for no other reason than because I want to. I read lengthy parliamentary reports just because I can. I love to sift through pages and pages of yougov survey data comparing them with the last six months of similar polling for fun.

I'm kinda weird in what amuses and entertains me.

Wow. You and Rowan and Nic Williams should team up for ultimate unstoppability.

My problem?

Confidence.

Kitchen please note, I am only speaking for myself.

I am angry with Justine because of that comment. To me that says she is not taking in to account the massive hardships many women suffer. And how well many trans people do. In other words: all things are not equal. Yes, some trans people have an awful time and some women live the life of Riley. But that comment suggested she didn't understand the reality that many transwomen currently coming out are coming from a very privileged position indeed.

Mumsnet has got the reputation of being gender critical. I believe she has been invited to speak to the MP to explain those views. If she does not do so, if she instead explains her views, she is doing both her users and the consultation a disservice. She is in the position of consultant purely because of us and we are entitled to feel angry if she takes advantage of our posting on here to further her own views.

I have no objection to her stating that she does not agree with these views provided she presents them accurately and fairly. I still think it would be a good idea to take someone like Datun who is genuinely gender critical and can answer any questions asked.

red Perhaps it should be the most vulnerable person (although I'd like to see the word 'privilege' not used to invalidate/validate views at all) but in your case, it is usually yourselves, with the person disagreeing with you as the oppressor. And I think that is a fictional dynamic set up purely to make someone feel like they can't talk further for fear of sounding too privileged to live. But like you, I'm also strange in what I find interesting. I like working out if there is a kernel of reasonableness in there somewhere, the flicker of recognition that there is more than one way to look at this, more than one victim with rights that matter, or that another woman with completely different views might Have a Point too.

You see, Justine was not saying that women (or feminist women) did not have a point when she made the remark about how her life would have been harder were she trans. She was saying something quite different and true. That, for her, her life would have harder in those circumstances. Choosing to make that statement doesn't indicate she wants to make the lives of trans people easier in ways that you would perceive as oppressive to women. There are no rules about what opinions it is acceptable for her to put forward.. You're not in a position to make any.

What I wonder is, you've got brains. Why didn't you think through how congregating on mumsnet might impact the website owner, their media profile and their ability to impact your cause. Surely it would have made sense to gather and bring infamy to a website you owned, or to have made sure Justine talked the talk before you made her website infamous for this issue. You can hardly get to this point and complain she's not quite feelin it. You weren't promised anything. It was your idea and Justine facilitated debate where she could (although you have done your best to close that down actually in favour of propaganda, hysteria and mutual appreciation) and facilitating debate is all Justine ever said she wanted to do.

word tsunamis...Well. you are the ones filling thread after thread with intentionally repetitive, self-congratulatory, occasionally circular arguments. If you put up with ten tsunamis from m in a row you would still have done 90% of the talking.

pratchett So now a woman who refuses to become intimidated when asked about her gender but simply says 'I'm a woman' and doesn't get drawn into proving it is a narcissist. Yes, you really want to help women, don't you.Is the right answer reeling off a list of anatomical bits? No, I won't be doing that, sorry to spoil your party trick.

You do not have the political corner or the media corner.

kitchenrollinrollinrollin

This statement of yours is true and therein is the central issue.

Its about power.

Christ I can't be arsed with painfully self important walls of text.

Me neither.

Pratchet nailed it with These are just word tsunamis to try to bore us into giving up.

You have been trying to silence women who aren't in alignment with you for quite a while now.

I haven't found this. I've posted walls of non-GC word salad, including on this thread I think, and had some considerate and respectful responses that I'm still thinking about (thank you, GC feminists of Mumsnet!). And I see plenty of polite engagement with people who identify themselves as men, liberal feminists, trans women, and others who aren't necessarily 'in alignment' with the prevailing view here.

Of course, if someone comes on shouting about how wrong GC feminists are, they can expect a bit of shouting back. But that's not the same thing as silencing.