New guidelines - we aren't allowed to refer to natal sex

[Maryz]

According to KateMumsnet:

"We also thought it might be useful to clarify our thinking about general terms for trans people. Having said that TIM is not okay, it seems a bit illogical to allow other terms which hang upon natal sex."

Well that's that really, isn't it.

We are all being told to pretend that men have become women.

Am I going to be deleted/banned for this post?

Ooh I like she/he/they who must not be named. It's accurate plus it makes me smile and I think humour is really important. But preferably in full - I know it's long winded but acronyms are really confusing.

omg that is ridiculous! cannot believe mumsnet are really pandering to that bullshit!

@MNHQ I would like a response to Hyppolyta's post too....

Haha; MWCBN 'men who can't be named' would be quite funny...

So They Who Must Not Be Named?

How about 'our dear friends'

Trams for trans men?

Do we have a quorum here on Twmnbn?

They is othering tho
Gulag

So They Who Must Not Be Named?

I'd use it but I can guarantee MNHQ will come along and say it's goady!

I vote for they who must not be named (although in fairness I already have). If it's banned we'll just think of something else. Keep one step ahead. We're good at this.

Look, MNHQ have said that collective terms for transpeople that refers to their biological sex is a no go.

Whilst amusing, some of the more creative suggestions are just going to get deleted and persisting in using the. will result in suspension/banning. Which would be a crying shame and wil just be playing into the hands of thebTRAs hanging over their screens with their fingers hovering over the report button.

I'll be using transwoman, transman or transperson.

My line in the sand is any biological male who has murdered or harmed women or children. I'll call them men. Since MNHQ havevsaid that context is important, I hope they will agree with me.

Sorry about typos. Fuck you, ipad!

They who must not be named is good. It was fine for Gina ford so can’t see what the problem would be here. It’s a yes from me.

My line in the sand is any biological male who has murdered or harmed women or children. I'll call them men. Since MNHQ havevsaid that context is important, I hope they will agree with me.

So your red line is justified but mine isn't?

And they may not agree with you, btw.

Feminism relates to women as a sex. Is this board going to be renamed?

No Ereshkigal Not at all. Of course you are entitled to your own line in the sand. I apologise if I gave you that impression.

If MNHQ don't agree with my line in the sand - well, that's still my line in the sand.

Bore I'm not using transwomen out of principle now; in the context of prohibiting terms that refer to men as male cos men who say they are women don't like it, when women don't want men to reduce womanhood to stereotypes & call themselves women and also want to be able to name reality because it is important that we can do so, I find it a double standard upholding male supremacy to say that women's discomfort is irrelevant but men's is important and women must stop doing what men say makes them uncomfortable. It's also coercive; men should never get to dictate women's speech re our reality or indeed re men, and as i say in this context I can no longer use the tern transwoman cos of what I now see that as upholding on this board. Men who say they are women or acronyms should be fine, can't see how they break the guidelines. Same with transgender males, esp cos males identify in many different ways, i.e gender fluid, trans non binary, trans femme etc.

Same same leyat, used to do it but then they declared war

I mean, it is a declaration of open warfare from transactivists, no doubt

I think TWMNBN is great. When it’s banned we think of a new term. Like leyat I am not saying woman or trans woman any more on principle.

Yep same as leyat

Not using transwoman any more.

YY Juzza.

So not 'IFOWONO'?