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.

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

You don't have to worry, trust me on that, you're on your own, there is no them and us, it's all you now.

Op there is no point. Really just stop interacting, they will just keep attacking.

Utterly bizarre.

No answers, no rationale but we are attacking you when this thread is about shutting us up.

dione

Ive been very polite

I havent been mean

I do not disagree per se with your OP although iwe are obviously coming at it from different angles

I am not attacking in any way shape or form like the majority of the posters on this thread

I also want to see what MNHQ says

To clarify

I dont think the majority of posters on this thread are attacking in any way shape or form

I dont think that bit was clear in my post

Unless you are a trans child or trans family.

But if you are a trans family, why wouldn't you want the NSPCC to answer questions about guidance placing trans-identifying children outwith safeguarding protocols and therefore making them at greater risk of abuse? I would have thought it would be top on the family agenda.

Do you see this as attacking? Posters are asking quite valid questions. I don’t see personal attack here.

I would welcome an explanation from anyone on how it’s rational to put a male rapist in a female prison. Also on the ethical issues around the shift in standard of care and using powerful harmful drugs for an indication they’ve never been tested or approved for in children.

What I see repeatedly is questions being asked on the GC side and no reply being given, only the assertion that we are attacking, transphobic or being mean, and should therefore shut up.

I realise these are awkward questions and I accept that people may have very different points of view on this entire issue. But that’s a cue to debate and that’s not happening.

I’m asking, politely, what I feel to be valid questions. I’m not getting any answers. If there’s no problem here and I’m just a nasty bigot, these questions should be easily answered. But nobody is.

I don't want to decide who particles in threads ShrodingersSturdyPyjamas. I want guests to turn up.

I want guests to turn up

Same ...

But that's what you are implying Dione. Just perhaps something is very wrong here and that's why the guests didn't turn up? Why is it the fault of people who asked relevant questions?

Why won't they answer our questions OP? They could reassure us that they did care about safeguarding and we would be fine.

I cannot make sense of your post bluntness other than the vague sense that you don’t wanna be my friend anymore.

Op what do you think? You started the debate, you must have some thoughts?

They didn't turn up because they did not have answers. They would rather the questions were not asked.

There were plenty of people on both sides of the debate on the Stella Creasy thread. Stella came to that thread as a politician, to ask people to lobby their MPs to support an amendment to legislation. Obviously, people are going to want to scrutinise that amendment before they agree to lobby their MPs. Christ on a bike, that should be obvious. Or are we supposed to tug our forelocks and say, "Yes, important person Stella, we will do what you tell us rather than make our own democratic decisions"?

MNHQ should have primed Stella better, yes, but the answer Stella did give was evasive and misleading. All she had to do was tell the truth about her amendment: "Yes, MNers, my amendment uses the language "has or is presumed to have" the protected characteristic of sex, because it is intended to include trans people as well as women."

Then everyone could have made an informed decision on whether or not to lobby their MP to support the amendment. GC feminists would have said no thanks, genderists would have said brilliant, off to email my MP now.

That's y'know.... how it works in a democracy. Weird, I know.

We did not hear what they had to say.

Because they did not want to hear what we had to say. It's not the gender critical people who announce "No Debate".

No one wants to interact any more. No one.
*
You killed your own cause.*

Funny, isn't it, that mainstream newspapers are beginning to print articles asking the same questions we have been discussing for a couple of years.

Funny, isn't it, the FWR is the fastest-growing section in MN.

Why won't they answer our questions OP?
That's a really good question.

The thing is, it's self defeating. Because the gc crowd pretty much only influence each other, no one else now. Folks don't even click on the threads any more

Couldn't disagree more. Yes I'm GC but only since discovering FWR and I just can't understand why any female isn't more interested in this topic especially with such outlandish comments such as 'female penis' which just isn't biologically possible

They want to talk about what they want to talk about.
They don't have the answer.
Something else came up.
They think the question is derailing or goady or irrelevant or leading.
They do not care about women and children.
They have answered the question previously.
In most organisations, the person booked to present new initiatives is different to the person employed to Robustly Defend stuff.
They're afraid.
They just don't want to.

Perhaps MNHQ will ask them. I hope so.

They want to talk about what they want to talk about.

Then they can do a guest post. That is different to a Q&A.

Or it maybe something else, that I haven't thought of.

Then they can do a guest post. That is different to a Q&A.

This.

The thing is, it's self defeating. Because the gc crowd pretty much only influence each other, no one else now. Folks don't even click on the threads any more.

Bluntness can you tell me the basis for that statement? Do you have access to some MN stats on this? Or do you just mean that you don’t click on them anymore?

Dory MN is only becoming known for the trans debate?

Let’s not kid ourselves, for the vast majority of the population MN is known for penis beaker and being the source of silly tabloid articles about people behaving badly. As far as I can see being known for a strong GC voice is a distinct improvement in reputation.

I think dione that your first throught and the one about the person booked are probably the correct answers

I think MNHQ shoukd be told if its any of your examples of why they didn't continue

Its a very poor show by the NSPCC in this case

I think dione that your first throught and the one about the person booked are probably the correct answers

That may well be true but it’s hardly news to anyone that MN questions/challenges people doing web chats in a robust manner. There should be someone at the NSPC who can handle that surely?

Yep

Wouldn't disagree with that nona

A) they should have done some reasrch about Mumsnet

B) mumsnet should have told them that this is a hot safeguarding topic if they havent already

C) the parameters of the discussion should have been set in advance

As i said ...a poor show

But my personal opinion is that the two reasons given by dione are probably the right ones. As opposed to for example...something else came up or they dont care about children

I thought diones post covered virtually every excuse i can think off

That may well be true but it’s hardly news to anyone that MN questions/challenges people doing web chats in a robust manner

Sorry forgot to mention this

Time after time people , politicians, 'celebs' etc underestimate this place

So i do think its new to a lot of hard of thinking people

I dont know why they dont do their research...but they dont seem to

Shame on NSPCC. If they have done their due diligence they would have been able to come here and answer questions. They seemingly don't know the answers but have supported policy changes nevertheless.