MNHQ We Have a Problem

[DioneTheDiabolist]

In the past week, we have had the NSPCC pull out of a Web chat about their Speak Out Stay Safe (teaching children how to stay safe from abuse and what to do if they have any concerns) and PANTS (teaching parents how to talk to young children about staying safe from sexual abuse in an age appropriate way) programmes.

We have also had Stella Creasey MP pull out of a Web chat about making misogyny a hate crime.

As I am interested and invested in the safety and wellbeing of women and children, I am disappointed that these Web chats did not take place, seemingly because the views of the NSPCC and Stella Creasey regarding Trans issues do not align with some GC MNetters.

I want to ask MNHQ, what are you doing/can be done to prevent this from happening again? Plenty of women and parents here would like to hear what they have to say about keeping our children safe and legislation being drafted to protect women.

What bowl said

I don't think either Dione or Bluntness are making any assumptions about FWR; they've both spent enough time there.

"Mumsnet is not about controlling speech. Mumsnet is one of the most important resources for freedom of speech right now."

Unless you are a trans child or trans family. There is never another point of view allowed to have any meaningful discussion without being hounded off the thread.

I value MN as a forum with wide ranging subjects, serious or silly, informative or just chat. There are many funny, wise, helpful silly and supportive women and men on here every day.

However MN is allowing one very vocal section of the whole forum to be seen to be taking over as with these two guests, it was apparent where it was going so many of us didn't even bother to ask a question.

As OP said "Yes the trans issue is important.
But there is more to child safeguarding than trans issues and there is more to misogyny than trans issues."

There is more to MN than trans issues, but its sad that the subject from the GC point of view is what seems to be what MN is getting known for (valid though many of their points are in essence) to the exclusion of anything else.

MN is becoming a laughing stock, sadly.

it was apparent where it was going so many of us didn't even bother to ask a question

I wouldn't disagree with you after the first few questions were asked

Although some on there were bothered and may well have appreciated 'back up'

But the thread was up for days before that

I just think that most people couldn't be bothered or honestly didnt have a question to ask

Oh and ROGD is NOT a real medical term but yet again the badly researched information is coming out.

ROGD is used. Gender dysphoria is the diagnosis and rapid onset is a subtype/qualifier.

The TRA lobby have actually put a great deal of effort into getting previously accepted medical diagnostic criteria and the standard of care changed.

There was s study on it released the other week which has been met with much unpleasantness by the TRA lobby.

MN is far from a laughing stock. They have been threatened with legal action, the founder was swatted a while back over a different issue. Why do you think that is? One does not need to go after a laughing stock with lawyers, or threats, because they are not a threat.

dory FWR is not hostile to the families of trans children. We have had multiple queries/worries expressed by such families and posters have been extremely supportive. Again this is NOT about persecuting anyone who identifies as a different gender. It’s about asking questions on safeguarding, medical treatment of minors, ill thought out safety policies etc. Those questions are awkward ones. But they need to be asked.

Look at the scandal engulfing the greens at the moment re: David Challenor. That’s safeguarding failings of exactly this type, unfolding in real time. Look at the male bodied prisoner who has just been convicted of raping women while they were housed in a women’s prison despite being in there for rape - that’s a terrible failure of safeguarding.

There are ways through this that would allow women to remain safe, children’s safeguarding to remain strong AND transgender people to be respected, safe and free from discrimination. At the moment however that’s not happening and it’s entirely justified to ask why not.

However MN is allowing one very vocal section of the whole forum to be seen to be taking over as with these two guests, it was apparent where it was going so many of us didn't even bother to ask a question.

You are so full of it, it was up for days and nothing.

Would a solution / work around to be something like

• put up 2 threads one to be explicitly not cover any trans-related questions (and any posed there are deleted)
• one for trans-related questions

With an agreement upfront that the organisation will coherently answer X number of trans questions only, and MN mods select them but then insists they are properly answered too?

So for NSPCC it could have been e.g.
Does the NSPCC see any safeguarding risk to girls regarding letting self-id boys share toilets and changing facilities.
or
How does the 'privates are privates rule' sit with the new guidance that self-id transgirls should be allowed to change in girls changing areas
or whatever?

It's not ideal, but while organisations are changing policies without debate (c.f. girl guides), feelings are bound to run high by people who feel that the rights and privacies of females aren't being respected?

If anyone could go onto FWR right now, and explain the rationale for putting a rapist into a woman's jail, that would be grand. Thanks in advance.

I would be very disappointed if MN stopped posters asking questions on self-id etc if it is in any way relevant. I don't think that what has happened is spamming (given that it came from individual posters and I don' t think it was an effort to derail or swamp it is simply the case that a significant number of mners had questions on the same topic (as often happens on web chat threads) it should not be beyond the wit of any organisation/person taking part in a webchat to deal with this (i.e. answer the themes).
My suggested solution would be for mn to be upfront with organisations/individuals that there is an extremely wide audience (presumably the reason they are having the chat on mn) and that that wide community may have questions on controversial topics including self-id and its impact on women/children (seems reasonable for a site purporting to mainly appeal to mothers/women).

it should not be beyond the wit of any organisation/person taking part in a webchat to deal with this (i.e. answer the themes).

This, exactly. If their position is reasonable and they can allay these relevant concerns, they will surely be able to do so.

Would a solution / work around to be something like
*- put up 2 threads one to be explicitly not cover any trans-related questions (and any posed there are deleted)

• one for trans-related questions**

No. Completely unreasonable. Effectively censorship.

Issues of safeguarding and corporate attitudes towards trans issues are deeply entwined. It is utterly unacceptable to expect people not to ask such questions.

It's moot though isn't it.

No one is answering any questions are they . No one. As said it's game over. The gc crowd killed it.

Slow hand clap. 👏👏👏

Effectively censorship.
Who is being censored?

I think it’s a bit disingenuous to claim people with one viewpoint ‘take over’ a discussion that you yourself were not part of at the time.

Even before all the gender stuff there has been thread after thread on mn for the years I’ve been here moaning about the feminists and what’s mn going to do about the mean feminists because they’re hounding people off the site. It’s embarrassing for grown women to run to the boss to try to get other women to shut up.

If you see something you consider phobic or abusive then report it. If you see an interesting webchat then contribute to it. If you disagree, disagree and make your point. Mn is a fantastic resource for women and it’s full of fascinating stuff. Charities and mps should want to talk to the posters here.

Yes people are answering questions - swim England for example had changed their policies ‘ahead of the game’ to something which was not complying with the equality act. The Man Friday protests got them to reconsider that.

This needs to be discussed openly. no group, no matter how marginalised, gets a free pass when it comes to things like safeguarding. We have to be able to talk about this and ask questions.

Repeating the statement above: this week a male bodied prisoner was convicted of raping female prisoners. They’d been placed in a female prison despite being convicted of rape. They then went on to rape two female prisoners.

That is the sort of thing we have to be able to talk about. Do you not think that situation should NEVER have been allowed in the first place? How can that possibly be justified?

I think it’s a bit disingenuous to claim people with one viewpoint ‘take over’ a discussion that you yourself were not part of at the time

Lol and there we go with the wide eyed innocence.

No one is an idiot here, we all see what's happening.

No one wants to interact any more. No one.

You killed your own cause.

No one is answering any questions are they . No one. As said it's game over. The gc crowd killed it.

Well, get over and explain it all to us then!

What is the rationale for putting a rapist intona female jail?

How does safeguarding work with the girl guides?

What are all the answers we can't see?

Charities and mps should want to talk to the posters here.

I agree. And posters here are interested in what they have to say. This week both Stella Creasey and the NSPCC have pulled out of chats on MN. We did not hear what they had to say. I think that that is a problem and I started this thread to find a solution.

We did not hear what they had to say. I think that that is a problem and I started this thread to find a solution.

So you won't participate in a thread, but you want to decide who does?

Surely the solutuon is to pull your own finger out and participate?

MN is clearly not becoming a laughing stock, there are so many intelligent and well informed women who enjoy having in-depth conversations here, many backed by evidence, including evidence from scientific, medical and social science fields. I find it to be a great resource to discuss a great many issues. Just because this is one of the few easily accessible public forums for women will mean some topics are discussed more because there are very few places where women can talk to other women around the world freely and exchange ideas and information and so much of media is edited and owned by men. We are sometimes going to emphasize other topics that are ignored in other contexts because our free speech is starting to be affected and as a result women are looking to have our voices heard.

I read MN more than ever, not less and I often discuss topics that have been discussed on here with other women and men IRL. The result of this involvement with MN is encouraging me to become MORE involved with local politics where I live, even though I am in the USA. None of this aligns with the idea of MN being a “laughing stock” whoever is forming those opinions, as it is just a subjection opinion. I love the intelligence and depth of analysis and discussion on MN, when you want it, along with all the tips, good laughs, advice and shopping ideas.

I didn’t post on the thread either so save your snark bluntness . I’m just not moaning about the people that did. This us and them stuff is getting really tired.

Dione if the nspcc and Stella want to talk then they should talk. If not, then not. If they only want to answer specific things then they could do a pre-prepared q and a. Whatever. It’s not ok to try and make mn shut up a group of people because you disagree with them asking the questions they wanted to ask when they were invited to do so.

No one wants to interact any more. No one.

You killed your own cause.

Yes because they were all queuing up to engage before

I didn’t post on the thread either...I’m just not moaning about the people that did. This us and them stuff is getting really tired

Yup

It’s embarrassing for grown women to run to the boss to try to get other women to shut up.

This. I'm not sure what OP hoped to achieve with this thread. Get the bad women told off? Go you.