Dealing with inflammatory posts re Trans on MN

[womanformallyknownaswoman]

I am concerned to see the message below from MNHQ at the end of the T thread. Regarding posts that I consider "goady", I have a personal policy of not feeding them, not engaging and not rising to the bait. I ignore them. OPs looking for conflict as a way to feed themselves won't get it from me. Firstly, it's exhausting-they are not interested in dialogue, despite what they say, and secondly the best way to deal with them, imo, is to starve them of attention and not rise to the bait. Don't give them what they want i.e. a fight and conflict.

My concern is I predict there will be a lot more new threads and OPs looking for a fight, as the public becomes more aware of the issues and the tide starts to turn against TRAs. They will want to try and get this Place closed down for discussion, and none of us want that to happen.

Personally I have found it empowering to learn how not to engage and to turn it back on them if absolutely necessary, by the use of ridicule and short rebuttals of their nonsense. I am happy to share some techniques if it will help plus learn more from others. There's no point in trying to score points and win all the arguments they make as it's the engagement down their rabbit holes they want - they literally feed off conflict. They're anti-social remember, so any attention is better than none. They want to keep you coming back and arguing, so they can derail, prolong, provoke and generally make life difficult for MNHQ - to force them to take action. The negative attention "turns on" those looking for a fight….so please don't feed them, ignore them and lets keep this place open.

Message for MN:

Hi all

Since this thread is getting near its end, this seems like a good moment to make a really serious point.

We've just made some more deletions on this thread, and we're pretty exasperated tbh - we feel we're running out of ways to say 'please stick within the TGs or risk losing MN as a place to discuss this issue.'

We're really proud of our commitment to free speech, and we put a huge amount of time and resources to enabling this debate to take place - as many of you have pointed out, it's one of the few places left.

To those who haven't yet been able to stop and look at things from our end of the barrel - please understand that you're risking this space for everyone; if you really can't debate civilly with those you disagree with, it might be time to consider that MN is no longer the place for you. We're sorry to have to say this - we don't like it one bit - but tbh nothing else seems to have got through so far: we're at a point of last resort.

Thanks to all those who modify their first instincts and manage to make their points in a calm, considered and civilised manner - even in the face of goadiness. We appreciate it (and so would Michelle.)

Thanks all

MNHQ

I disagree Simon, in that I think using incorrect sex pronouns for people is really unhelpful for women and trans people . I don’t think we should ever have allowed sex on passports etc to be changed. I remember reading as a teenager that this was done to avoid attacks on transsexuals by male sexual partners who may have not realised the sex of the person they were sleeping with. That was clearly kindly motivated but it has backfired now. I feel using correct sex pronouns is political, but I will avoid using pronouns at all if it helps all Mumsnet users to be able to chat freely about concerns regarding self id.

I read most of the T thread, missed the end, but didn't contribute as there were great arguments being made and questions asked. I would be really upset if we lost mumsnet as a place to discuss this issue. It can be so hard to stay respectful in the face of some of the assertions made.Liking the TGLWGH thing.

I disagree Simon, in that I think using incorrect sex pronouns for people is really unhelpful for women and trans people . I don’t think we should ever have allowed sex on passports etc to be changed

I agree with this, and making the point that gender and sex are different is why I'm reluctant to suggest it; but I think the line can be drawn without deliberately insulting individuals:

e.g. 'They/their' or 'he (a biological woman)' or 'transwoman'.

Pronouns are gender constructs, using them for the 'wrong' sex is not denying biology. We ask gender determinist posters to avoid labelling us as cis. I think we can be courteous and still be firm.

I was reading that thread last night, and the ops constant comments about “lies” were hard to take after twenty pages of it. I appreciated the intelligent, measured responses from mumsnetters. It is hard to stay calm, but perhaps that is just me. I tend to feel the rage when Faced with gaslighting. I didn’t comment at all last night for that reason, I was too cross, and didn’t want to post in anger.

I've taken a step back lately since I've felt really drained by the whole issue.

I think it was perhaps inevitable that we get a tide of new posters who can be divided into 1)goady TRA's 2)newly peaked to the topic and not grasping that there are transfolk out there NOT wanting to be represented by the current wave of TRA's and being out of order towards them.

I've learnt so much from the FWR regulars here but it's taken 2 years of reading, re-reading and patient understanding, for me to reach a point where I can almost articulate myself without making a complete tool of myself. It's a complicated bit of mental gymnastics to navigate the enormity of these issues and I'd be fucking devastated to have this forum taken from us.

So, to myself more than anyone, but to us all, please continue to replicate the dignity and humility and patience that's brought so many of us to peak and beyond. We are an incredible bunch and we shall continue to make progress. Our way. Not their way.

#TGLWGH

But “cis” is different to referring to someone male as “he” surely ? One is not true, the other demonstrably is. But anyway I don’t want to let my inner pedant take over... I will be careful when posting as it seems to be a communal decision that it is best .

I do think pronouns are sex based not gender constructs though. But will avoid pronouns entirely. ( please shoot me if I ever use zie )

It has been a long time since Feminists felt like millions of women had our backs. A very long time. I am grateful to MN for providing a free speech zone for women.

The fact that we are even having this conversation points to how central MN has become to this debate.

Thank you MNHQ for allowing us the platform. I'll do my best to not react to GFs because I see this space as crucial.

I’m not trying to police the threads, but at the same time, I wonder if the sheer volume of posts isn’t damaging.

There are posters who must spend hours daily reading and composing detailed posts often on the same subjects time and again. Some of them are going to occasionally snap.

The number of threads must contribute to the ‘not another trans thread ffs’ sentiment so often expressed or to the appearance of mn being the hotbed of hatred or whatever it was we were described as.

I know it’s not the point of a chat forum really, but I do think we could help ourselves by posting less.

Maybe if someone asks a question we could point them at an existing thread on the same subject or only start new threads when there’s something actually to be said. At the minute we seem to start them every time anything trans is mentioned anywhere - including twitter. Maybe we could start a thread per subject (sports, AWS, refuges, newspeak etc) and capture what we know and update them as we go on so whenever someone says ‘what’s the issue with xyz’ we’ve got something to point them at.

I don’t know, just thinking how we can not shoot ourselves in foot really...

Taking note. I tend to lurk more than post & rarely read threads in real time so I am constantly impressed by the patient carefully worded responses to posts that are clearly intentionally provocative.
for all!

This is sad.
I have been educated here. We handed so many men their patronising arses on a plate (Brian from Hull, Worst Nightmare internet boy, Technics etc.) and now MNHQ are considering pulling the plug.
Last week it felt like the tide was turning. Tonight, not so much.

@SirVix

You well might see calling someone cis and mis-gendering as different and personally I'd agree with you in the sense the former is an irrelevant label used for ideological purposes and the latter is a factual description of a persons natal sex.

However, deliberate mis-gendering is deemed to be offensive by many members of the Trans community (not just TRAs).

It would seem to me to be a shame that we fall foul of the pressure being exerted on MNHQ and losing this space because we insist on making a point about preferred pronouns - especially when the issue is so easily dealt with by using initials or they/their i.e. side stepping it all together.

I didn't used to feel this way and had quite a heated debate about it on a thread a while ago, where the ever wise Datun and RedToothBrush staged an "intervention" ;-)

They were right and now I reconcile this in my head as by avoiding pronouns at all I'm making a point in and of itself, without putting this space at risk.

@womanhuman

I think that might be a good idea to explore further.

You're right I think about the number of threads, so finding a way to reduce them but still get information out would be a good way forward.

Needs a bit more thought.

I know it’s not the point of a chat forum really, but I do think we could help ourselves by posting less.

Maybe if someone asks a question we could point them at an existing thread on the same subject or only start new threads when there’s something actually to be said. At the minute we seem to start them every time anything trans is mentioned anywhere - including twitter. Maybe we could start a thread per subject (sports, AWS, refuges, newspeak etc) and capture what we know and update them as we go on so whenever someone says ‘what’s the issue with xyz’ we’ve got something to point them at.

I don’t know, just thinking how we can not shoot ourselves in foot really

I get what you’re saying, I do. On lots of forums that would work. I go on work forums where you are encouraged to read the old posts on the topic and post on that thread which is neatly filed away.
It works in some environments but it is never really been the case for MN (in some areas maybe but generally it doesn’t tend to work). I think it’s because MN isn’t a specialist site dedicated to one thing only. The mind set of dedicated threads isn’t there from established etiquette for this forum as whole and also it isn’t there for many people who come over from social media who aren’t really forum types.

🙋I was turned as a lurker and the 'posting less' idea wouldn't have worked for me. Issues would come up or TRA would post, and I would think 'wonder what Datun/Cote/Camper etc think of this'. When you're still confused it's really helpful to see fresh debates.

Completely would echo what CisMyArse says. Eg pronouns are now a red line issue for me but I wasn't brought to this stage by people shouting and spluttering rude abuse at people who wanted specific pronouns. Instead it was by reasoned argument.

Thanks for everyone's contributions - I am reflecting and digesting them all. I also appreciate the comments of long term members to context the recent comments. I'm imagining MN's concerns are two fold - firstly workload for them and secondly managing whoever the "critics" are.

Personally I am still trying to get clear on the problem(s). As I read it, MN are asking for less work plus a quieter life.

The issues facing us all, including MN, as I see them are, that as this area of debate becomes more public, it becomes political and visible. There will be an increase of newcomers, repeat content plus unfortunately trolls. We can police ourselves in terms of calling time on threads that are getting nowhere (TGLWGH), call each other out if our comments get too reactive and personal and so on. But really I see the increase of people engaged in the topic, the increase of content etc as an inevitable side effect.

Moreover we can't police the reports made by trolls to MN (you know the ones "I'm offended and hurt - they're getting at me and so on). That's out of our control. That's why I recommend not engaging at all because any engagement gives the trolls the ammunition to make reports. (I can foresee #TGLWGH becoming weaponised, for example. So a troll will complain they're getting falsely targeted by its use).

Re the T post - I recognised the MO straight away and realised it was more likely than not a troll post. I reported it straight away as such, said I didn't need a response and then ignored the post and thread - didn't read anything. I noted the increasing number of comments, had a quick peek, confirmed my suspicions and then made one comment trying to alert others to "there's no point wasting anymore time and effort". I feel angry when people defend the good quality of the responses - the problem is not that - it's not that there's a lack of smart talent on here - it's that the receiver is using it for their own ends, not to further the debate. Like being in abuse - they will use it against you to bully and dominate and cry "wolf" to the authorities. So I only engage with OPs that I know are genuine, plus those who seem to be asking genuine questions. I can tell very quickly who is genuine and who's not.

Another solution is that we appoint a few "member mods" who vet proposed posts. They will have no extra admin preferences but can police OPs and additionally watch threads. I suppose like giving a "verified" flag. So at their intervention, a thread is effectively terminated. Like a second tier of admin. It would potentially make the content a little less timely, relying on availability and numbers of said "member mods" but the benefit would be cutting down on trolls and their posts, that hook in the unsuspecting. Just putting it forward as a "starter for ten".

Another thing I need clarifying is this: MN is a business and social media platform, much like, for example, Reddit. Reddit hosts very diverse political subs e.g. The Trump and also left wing subs. So I'm not understanding this comment:

The bottom line is that we can't continue to host the debate if the tone is as antagonistic as it has been - it just confirms the prejudices of our critics and leaves us in an impossible position.

@KateMumsnet and anyone else - would you elaborate more on the double bind described here - who are the critics and why are they so important? Where does free speech come in or does it not feature? I'm trying to understand the "pressures" on MN.

Our safety and that of our daughters is at stake, and that makes me very angry indeed. Can we not express that at all do you think ? And if so why not ?

I have felt angry at times. But anger can be channelled in different ways. It can become name calling and sarcasm or it can be expressed and stated and then reasons given. Assertiveness not aggression.
As Tallulah says I've expressed a great deal of anger without being deleted. Play the ball not the individual(s).

Regarding "too many threads" I think that's near impossible to deal with as this is such an open, organic site, especially when debating with opposing views. Threads are linked to when someone wants to learn more. Active debate is different.

Many debates are also set within the context of new articles or events, or new articles can be linked to, and that's important.

The number of threads must contribute to the ‘not another trans thread ffs’ sentiment so often expressed or to the appearance of mn being the hotbed of hatred or whatever it was we were described as.

^ TGLWGH - if someone wants to see it as hatred so be it; it won't stand up in law if we are courteous and stick to scientific facts, logic and reason.

The idea of posting less is an interesting one. I'm very new to MN (assumed I was too old as I'm a grandma!)

What struck me on the T thread was the sheer number of posts all making the same point, over and over. Even though I agreed with what was being said, just stopping for an hour to have a meal meant there were pages to wade through to get back on track.

From an outsider's POV, that could easily look like bullying, and at one point I did actually feel sorry for the OP as they had clearly had been away for a bit and were taken to task for failing to respond to dozens and dozens of rather aggressively-worded questions.

I have been a moderator elsewhere and am impressed at the leniency allowed on here by MNHQ. But moderating is time-consuming and hard work on a topic such as this. Self-policing will be of an enormous help to both the moderators and the wider public.

regarding the T thread - I feel angry when people defend the good quality of the responses. why?

I do know that sealions want to wind you up to the point that you disgrace yourself, but I have seen Datun very effectively extricate herself from that situation by simply saying 'I no longer believe that you are genuine, you are not listening to me, so I will disengage now'.

And in the meantime she had posted reams of cogent, compelling arguments which loads of people had read, because lets face it, we all love a bit of drama.

@MNHQ could it be a thought to have a short text at the top of the Feminism board (like with the Relationships board) reminding posters to remain calm, might stop knee-jerk replies? (Or even perhaps (as with the Sex topic) only allow members registered for a certain number of days to post?)

Also, sorry if I've missed this, but could you possibly clarify your position on neutral pronouns please? If we use 'they/their' to refer to those who prefer more specific (M/F) pronouns, is that ok or seen as antagonistic?

Thank you as always for everything you do as moderators on this board :)

I don’t use Reddit, so correct me if I am wrong, but I think it is a neutral site with mainly user moderators? It doesn’t claim to have any connection to its users and the owners aren’t asked for their opinion on current affairs.

Mumsnet is a commercial, but also campaigning site with a clear target audience and identity and discussion is moderated by MNHQ.

That makes them a very specific target for anyone who wants to create mischief by portraying the site not just as a ‘nest of vipers’ but a ‘transphobic nest of vipers’.

margeh that was a problem. The op was then accused of disappearing, 'plopping,' whereas it's likely they had lunch and then was otherwise engaged, plus it was impossible to keep up with that many answers.

I challenged the plopping assumption, not really enough, and assumptions like that could definitely be challenged more to rein in perceived bullying or pile ons. Perhaps even, if really needed, asking MNHQ to remind people 1 v eleventy billion is a Herculean task.

Unfortunately in the absence of an op it becomes speculation and the debate rolls on which is hard to deal with if the op returns and can become across as everyone talking about them rather than with them.

There have been many threads where a poster posts a load of stuff that could be then discussed (and needs to be), and they don't, which is frustrating.