Justine stands up for FWR in The Times

[SwearyG]

Justine is quoted in The Times today saying that TRAs are pressuring advertisers to withdraw from the site but they’re willing to take the hit to keep the discussion open. It’s very heartening after the threads of the last few days re FWR being hidden and the worries about this space being censored.

to @JustineMumsnet - thank you.

Amazing! Thank you Justine and MNHQ

Another new user of Mumsnet and de-lurking to say Thank You! To Justine and MNHQ for standing up for women and allowing debate to happen here.

[[https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/if-mumsnet-can-stand-up-for-free-speech-why-cant-mps/]]

Call to MPs to step up and for Justine and MNHQ from James Kirkup at The Spectator!

Very well said James Kirkup!

MN hasn't taken any kind of stand - they've made some excellent business decisions to make more money. Which is their business.

What a coincidence that very shortly before the article was published, FWR was muted. So when the article comes out, and it's confirmed that FWR will go back into active, posters are so grateful that MNHQ is 'supporting them' that they remove adblockers (previously complained about by MN owners) and there are threads about how many purchases are made via MN.

Which makes MN more money.

No advertisers were said to have pulled out, just that they'd been 'pressured'. Even if any advertisers had pulled out, the increased revenue from the article and the apparent 'turnaround' in muting FWR would exceed any loss.

Plus, the muting and reinstating has got lots of people agreeing to essentially 'behave better' around the trans/self ID 'debate' for fear of losing it. Wins all over the place for MNHQ.

Lets not forget that in 2016 Paris Lees was invited as a guest speaker to MN blogfest which many MNetters were opposed to as it was felt that a public debate should be supported but that there are numerous transwomen (but less famous and likely to attract attention) who do not seem to hold such anti-feminist views. You can see the thread and MNHQ responses below.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/2775504-Why-is-Paris-Lees-speaking-at-Mumsnet-and-are-MN-seeking-Spartacus-tees?pg=19&order=

So lets not see this as anything other than a very shrewd business decision. MNHQ takes no side in this, they are a multi-million pound business for a reason and will make more money from this article.

And all power to them. I think it's brilliant business strategy, but I won't get teary eyed thinking it's anything other than that.

I agree there is a very strong business case for supporting women in this.

Of course, my heart wants MNHQ to understand and be on the right side of fairness and justice too.
And I am certain that at least some of the mods definitely are. And I think possibly some are not quite as much. But it doesn't matter so much really.

Pragmatism dictates that I will be satisfied with the knowledge that women have ENORMOUS purchasing power and we can make or break political parties with our votes.

And we can do all that whilst silenced. The savvy players in politics and advertising and commerce will want to engage with and court us before we've been driven to organise entirely underground, where we may come up with a few unwelcome surprises.

What Justine Roberts said yesterday on the radio was:

"I think the problem with this is that the trans lobby have confused an issue about people quite rightfully sticking up for the idea of hard won women's rights around....(interrupted but previously JR gave women's refuge and rape counselling as examples)

The upshot of the change to the legislation that's been asked for around self-identity, is that you are putting women, including transgender women quite frankly in vulnerable positions potentially.
We need to be able to discuss if we are changing legislation, and for very good reasons because I am totally in favour of recognition, equality and fair treatment of all individuals and letting them live how they live.
But we need to be able to discuss these competing rights and it needs to not just be shut down....and I'm afraid and to be honest India you've got to see the other point of view, you can't just plough on with the [position] 'our issue is the only important one''

R0wantrees - And it IS important. And lucrative.

Don't doubt that if there was a potential financial loss for MN, the 'debate' would be shut down.

And that's not a criticism of MNHQ, it's business.

MN is hugely influential www.mumsnet.com/info/influencers

MN has run numerous successful public campaigns on issues primarily concerning women. They won't run a campaign apposing self ID because it could result in negative publicity and financial loss.

The ideal situation for MN is what they're doing now. That's what a very publically visible and influential business does if they have any sense.

I like MNHQ. I respect the owners and their business. I don't feel I have any 'say' in how it is run (lots of MNetters think differently). I don't have to be here, it would be no loss to MN if I wasn't.

So in being here, I am accepting their practices, views and the decisions they make.

But I can't believe that any company inviting Paris Lees as a guest at their blogfest has the interest of feminists or women in mind. Particularly as SO many posters objected and were basically told that they could like it or leave. Which is true (and I agree with MNHQ stance on complaints about how the site is run, it's free. We don't have to be here. It isn't 'our safe space' or any space that we should feel a sense of ownership over. We don't.)

But to now suggest MN is some bastion of womens rights is just inaccurate.

On an individual basis in terms of staff they may share some views, but as a business, they are motivated by money and publicity (which raises money) - as any business has to be.

I made no comment but think as these are Justine's actual words, they are worth repeating.

And attached are her actual words on the expressing concern about Paris Lees being an invited guest speaker thread.

I struggle with the comments. The idea that some of the frankly awful and anti-women (not even anti-feminist but anti-women!) things that PL said which were linked to on that thread such as this www.vice.com/en_uk/article/zn7b79/enjoying-catcalls-paris-lees-column being dismissed as 'a bit dodgy' and being compared to the comments of female columnists.

They're not the same.

So no, I won't now get misty eyed that MNHQ are making savvy business decisions. I respect those decisions (and they are v.clever) but I don't think it's motivated by feminism or supporting the very few (in comparison to MN as a whole) GC posters.

Maybe Justine has reflected on things and changed her views? Maybe she's been brought to peak-trans? Maybe she is just sticking to the basic premise of the site in giving women a place to talk about stuff?

Or maybe it's all about the ££££s, but I do think that you are minimising the guts it takes to put your head over the parapet on stuff like this. She has been the subject of doxxing and swatting attacks before, and by taking this stand she is no doubt increasing the chance that MNHQ staff will be subject to the same sort of harassment that forced Millwall and the venue in Bristol to refuse to host meetings.

We can welcome the fact that someone is prepared to do that on our behalf, surely?

I agree - I'm able to recognise that Justine putting her face and name merely to the concept of free speech places her at considerable risk, so even if this were partly a commercial decision, I can acknowledge this effort from her with my appreciation.

Unless I get banned for misgendering someone first.

(kidding)

Agree Olennas, few people are willing to say what Justine has said and even if it's just for the money it still takes guts in the current climate. And maybe you are right about hitting peak trans, I only hit it after Maria Mac was assaulted, only 7 months ago. There are a lot of women out there like me.

I do think that you are minimising the guts it takes to put your head over the parapet on stuff like this.

Yes this. And of course Mumsnet has to make money, it's a business.

MN power comes from women. Not just advertising. It has political influence.

The proposals, if they affect women in the way many here are predicting, therefore have major implications for MN.

If you can't talk about breastfeeding, pregnancy and childbirth, your general experiences as a woman - because it becomes deemed transphobic, what happens to MN?

Whilst this all might be a savvy business decision to make more money, the bottomline is that MN's entire existence could be at threat in the long run if they don't stand up now because of the nature of what people talk about. MN might end up in a situation where all references to mothers are deemed offensive. We might think this ridiculous now, but given the progression and manifestation of this, it would not surprise me either.

You say that Justine is defending users free speech, but actually gender critical posters speaking out in large numbers also protect MN and its business model too. Its mutually beneficial.

Political power comes from users. Even with her family connections, Justine wouldn't get a platform but for MN.

And yes personal beliefs do come into this, and given many posters have said they have only recently seen the inherent problems and conflicts of interests with TRAs, why shouldn't MN HQ also be in the same boat?

If you can't talk about breastfeeding, pregnancy and childbirth, your general experiences as a woman - because it becomes deemed transphobic, what happens to MN?

Yes, this is what I've thought all along. MN can't really afford to cave to this.

to Justine and Mumsnet for supporting debate.

We really need a like button!

I'm sure if Justine had changed her views on PL or had reached 'peak trans' and really supported the movement, she'd state it and take the hit.

She could. She won't. She's a business woman who has made millions out of what was originally a very small idea.

She's making more money now from 'putting her head above the parapet', not less. MN is a multi-million pound business. I know they save money on moderation but I guarantee they have PR and business advisors who analyse MN traffic, threads and posts. MNHQ said when FWR was muted that trans threads have taken the majority of their moderation time. So it's been such a huge issue for so long that they would be daft to not come out in some way as seeming to support the overwhelming number of posts against self - ID.

The attacks from Jeffrygate were abhorrent (and also highlighted the poor protection that MN gave to our data) but had nothing whatsoever to do with trans.

It was an 18 year old with ASD who hacked the site and some twats (possibly MRAs? Probably but we genuinely don't know as no-one was ever charged with the hoax calls) used that data.

I applaud her for her excellent business mind and her success. It is an example for all women.

But she really isn't risking anything. She's said some things that she knows will be appreciated by a vocal number of the people that make her money. I guarantee clicks on MN, deleted adblockers and purchases via MN have been massive the last few days. MNHQ wouldn't take a real risk affecting their income.

I don't blame them either. But I also don't think MNHQ are doing anything other than making money.

MN doesn't belong to us. It's not our safe place. It's a huge anonymous internet forum making a massive amount of money.

Long live free speech, MN and of course Justine for being brave enough to stand up for both.

If she criticised someone personally like Paris Lees, it would not necessarily work to her advantage, MNs advantage or gender critical arguments advantage.

Something about playing the ball not the player...

An ad homiem attack would play right into trans activists hands. They want 'victims' to act out their fantasy that MN is oppressing them.

If I were Justine I wouldn't do it under any circumstances for that reason. Its the very point of the TGLWGH stuff.

Justine was great in voicing what so many articulate and intelligent MNers have been saying for so long.

GYMMC, we all know MN is a business but it’s almost as if you have some personal investment in undermining the perception that Justine has done a good thing.

MN doesn't belong to us.

No it isn't owned by us. And whilst it is owned by Justine, it also doesn't belong to her either. Belonging has multiple meanings here.

MN can not exist without its users, and its users are beholden to how well run the site is. It is a symbiotic relationship.

She’s stood up publicly and said she’ll allow free speech on here even if there’s a financial hit.

That’s good enough for me, when everywhere else gets shut down.

She’s not taken the easy option and it comes across as rather off to be criticising possible motives as surely it’s the outcome that was needed.