Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

MNHQ Deletion Policy

935 replies

TheUterati · 30/04/2018 17:03

Earlier today the Trans Park Run thread was deleted in its entirety because SOME posts alleging cheating were deemed to be 'not in the spirit' of MN.

We have a thread about that running.

I have just been deleted on the Heather Peto thread for posting this:

"Bless..."

A post intended to be mildly dismissive.

That was deleted for breaking talk guidelines.

Give me a fucking break MNHQ.

"Bless..." gets a deletion!??!?!

TRA really have got you on a short chain, haven't they?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
MrPan · 01/05/2018 14:28

I'd think it's polite and non-costly to use a preferred pronoun. I know 2 trans people, one of each-way transition.

I'd be a massive twat IF I were to fail to recognise the efforts they have gone to in order to act on their dysphoria.

Original poster
TheUterati · 01/05/2018 14:32

Pan - many here disagree and the fact of that disagreement and our resolve to use language correctly, on the grounds that to do otherwise is promulgating a lie that is at bottom harmful to women and girls, needs to be respected. Where there are deletions for 'deliberate misgendering' that is not being respected and we are being told that the feelings of these individuals are more important firstly than the truth, and secondly than the feelings of women and girls who have a visceral objection to referring to males as females on the grounds that to do so causes both political and material harm.

OP posts:
LangCleg · 01/05/2018 14:33

Deleting it was an own-goal. Troll starts thread to provoke screenshot. Deluded right-winger takes bait. Then loads of other posters join to say "not in our names." Thread is deleted. TRAs now control the narrative because all they show in a screen grab is the first two posts.

@MNHQ - please take notice of this. It's not just us being controlled. It's you.

Original poster
TheUterati · 01/05/2018 14:34

Is it polite and non-costly to refer to Rachel Dolezal as a African American Woman? Would someone who refuses to do so be a massive twat for not recognising the life-changing commitment she has made to her identity as a African American woman and the very real price she has paid?

OP posts:
gendercritter · 01/05/2018 14:44

It's a good point. In her documentary it's plain she considers it rude and hurtful if you call her white.

vaginafetishist · 01/05/2018 14:45

It is not 'non costly' to use preferred pronouns. It's a form of coercion and the thin end of the wedge.

MrPan · 01/05/2018 14:45

Outside of the twisted world of the TRAs, there is another trans-world where people simply wish to conduct themselves as best as they can. eg the two people I know are no threat whatsoever to women and girls. I know that isn't the winning argument, at all, but it gives a cue-in to how anyone should address them.
The obv shift is where women's rights/sensitivities/spaces are threatened by the be-penised/unreconsituted/entilted male who take that which wasn't designed for them. For me at least there would be no respect there.

Just a universal refusal to engage with using a preferred pronoun in any circs with any trans person isn't the civilised way to react. No matter how much biological sanity is important to one. That doesn't mean being sucked into " it's our right to compromise your rights".

Pratchet · 01/05/2018 14:45

Yes vg it is

vaginafetishist · 01/05/2018 14:45

It's a very good point. Why is gender different?

vaginafetishist · 01/05/2018 14:46

So what about Rachel?

MrPan · 01/05/2018 14:54

Well quite.....RD....maybe I need to think a bit harder and further.

The trans people I know are now in their 50s and a very far distance from the TRAs.

Ereshkigal · 01/05/2018 14:58

It is not 'non costly' to use preferred pronouns. It's a form of coercion and the thin end of the wedge.

YYY.

RedToothBrush · 01/05/2018 14:59

Thank you to everyone who has been nice and sent flowers. At the same time it makes me feel a little uncomfortable at the same time as I don't want to be a 'victim' in all this too.

I was angry last night as its made out that there is only one group who suffers in all this.

Its simply not true. There are numerous groups being thrown under the bus by people who don't get it. You can not protect people from reality however well meaning you are. You can just try and help them find ways to cope within the world and get people to realise how they might not find life easy. Its not achieved by expecting the world to change for you by force and at the expense of other groups who are not necessarily advantaged either.

It is the force thats problematic not the identity.

I am just sick of this narrative of 'winning' and 'losing' and this means anything is justifiable which under any other circumstances we'd be the first in the queue to criticise.

Its all the bullshit that gets to me.

AssignedPuuurfectAtBirth · 01/05/2018 14:59

To be fair Lang, it wasn't a troll who started that thread. It was a regular. And it was a 'discussion thread, clearly open for comments on boths sides.

The bottom line is that this is either we accept that this going to happen OR we are going to have to police ourselves to the extent that no post, at any time, presented out of context could be miscontrued as extreme behaviour.

But, that's not going to happen because we are going to continue to debate the issues here.

So fuck them. Let them tell their lies because we are not shutting up

NotTerfNorCis · 01/05/2018 15:01

Breitbart has got wind of the fact that a thread about their freedom rally was started and deleted. Hmm

RefuseToDenounceBiology · 01/05/2018 15:04

I do find it costly to be pressured into playing along with a charade I don't agree with in order to be nice.

Some other people are similar to me. My right to name reality is important to me. So is the integrity of my commitment to women as a group which excludes males.

It disturbs me and induces anxiety when I am forced to do something I fundamentally disagree with because it is the done thing. I feel oppressed and not free in such a situation and I hope that people with dysphoria have enough respect for others that they don't force the issue in a way they have no right whatsoever to do. It is aggressive, damaging and imposing their difficulties on others.

Maybe other people have things they have to deal with too. Its not all about dysphoric people.

Ereshkigal · 01/05/2018 15:08

Yes because the creep has happened and a mile has been taken where an inch was given. What was once a polite welcoming courtesy is an obligation and moving towards being law and punishable not to do.

ErrolTheDragon · 01/05/2018 15:12

TRAs now control the narrative because all they show in a screen grab is the first two posts.

Maybe in a case like that, @MNHQ could do something along the lines of deleting specific posts, leaving the refutations and then close the thread (with an explanatory post) to further posts rather than deleting the whole thing?

RatRolyPoly · 01/05/2018 15:22

@MrPan I just dropped in to comment on the Rachel Dolezal thing (haven't read the whole thread - don't shoot me!).

To me the comparison is a false analogy, because whilst theoretically the two situations appear similar, the reality is that race and sex/gender are not sufficiently analogous in this situation.

What I mean by that is that we have very much evidence to suggest that they are too different to be compared. So for example there are hundreds of thousands of people worldwide and throughout recorded history who exhibit an "innate" sense of their own gender that does not match up to their bodily sex. That is not the case for race. As far as I'm aware there is one person that we know of... Perhaps if there were many thousands throughout human history I might see the point in comparing them!

So to me it's like someone saying to me "if you can be transgender, why can't you be transracial?", which seems a lot like saying "if you're telling me horses exist, and you're telling me rhinos exist, why not unicorns?" The idea of unicorns existing is far-fetched, not least because we have no blooming evidence that they do, but I can give you plenty of evidence that horses do. So how can I be obliged to solve the issues surrounding the mythical unicorn when I simply want to talk about the very real horse?

So yeah, why isn't it rude to "mis-race" Rachel Dolezal but it may be rude to misgender a transperson? Er, because transgenderism is a recognised state of being for human with plenty of evidence to back up its very real existence, but transracialism - yeah - that's not.

Hope this helps :)

LangCleg · 01/05/2018 15:26

To be fair Lang, it wasn't a troll who started that thread. It was a regular. And it was a 'discussion thread, clearly open for comments on boths sides.

Fair enough. I'm not shutting up either!

Pratchet · 01/05/2018 15:26

Nonsense Rat. Word salad.

RatRolyPoly · 01/05/2018 15:27

It wasn't very concise or clear, I'll grant you.

BarrackerBarmer · 01/05/2018 15:29

rat Your argument is "if lots of people believe in a thing it must be true"???

Really?

Pratchet · 01/05/2018 15:33

Actually I just felt it was poorly predicated, ultimately resulting in incoherence?

RatRolyPoly · 01/05/2018 15:33

No Barracker, that isn't my argument.

My argument is that you can't usefully compare something with which there is a great deal of very real evidence with something for which there is none.

You can't say that something (for which there is looooaaaads of evidence) probably doesn't exist simply because something that looks similar - for which there is no evidence - definitely doesn't exist.

It's silly.

You can see that.

Swipe left for the next trending thread