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?

[ALittleBitofVitriol]

Hideandgo
I find adult men appropriating womanhood to be deeply, viscerally offensive.
I find being scolded for recognising objective reality and speaking it forthrightly very odious.
I find it extremely not nice when male persons force their way into and shit all over my language expression, my safe spaces, my scientific definitions.

I don't care about causing offense or being seen as a bad woman. I don't succumb to emotional guilt trips. Sorrynotsorry

[DisturblinglyOrangeScrambleEgg]

I mean, I could go those places and try to police their talk, try to make them talk about me, use terms that I don't feel pick on me, but I think that that would be a bit much, a bit - dare I say - narcissistic.

[LastGirlOnTheLeft]

You said it Lang! Gibb, people are speaking THE TRUTH when they say men are men. If the truth is offensive to you, that's YOUR problem.

[ImagineBeing]

TRUTH no longer exists in the UK.

[OldmanOfTheWeb3]

Fuck that. I will not willingly call someone something they are not. This is reminiscent of when a judge declined compensation to the victim of assault by Tara Wolf (a MtF trans) because she used "him" in court.

Rules that require me to lie, are bad rules.

[Elletorro]

Mumsnet

This is a discriminatory policy. Indirect discrimination against GC feminists.Also dual characteristics such as autistic GC feminists.

I understand that moderating these discussions is expensive

But it doesn’t mean you can discriminate.

[ImagineBeing]

This is a discriminatory policy. Indirect discrimination against GC feminists.Also dual characteristics such as autistic GC feminists.

Christians too.

[terryleather]

"I find adult men appropriating womanhood to be deeply, viscerally offensive.
I find being scolded for recognising objective reality and speaking it forthrightly very odious.
I find it extremely not nice when male persons force their way into and shit all over my language expression, my safe spaces, my scientific definitions.

I don't care about causing offense or being seen as a bad woman. I don't succumb to emotional guilt trips. Sorrynotsorry"



Seconded ALittleBit

[Noqont]

Oh well. Just registered my Reddit account and will follow Gender Critical discussion over there. Free speech doesn't appear to have been closed down there anyway! I will continue to speak the truth :-)

[OldmanOfTheWeb3]

I think we could rename it GenderNet.

Perhaps "Keepitmumnet"? As in not allowed to speak.

[R0wantrees]

David Aaronowitch (chairman of Index on Censorship) writes in The Times today:

"And thus, in easy, treacherous steps dissent is deemed accessory to murder. It is an utterly pernicious logic. But thus too, in a dazzling paradox, the accusation of “hate speech” proves itself to be sometimes a form of hate speech. It is being deployed to intimidate and to shut people up... (continues)

concludes "This freedom boat, I’ve realised over the past half decade, is the same boat for all of us, even if we sit in different parts. Sink it, and we’re all drowned. There’s no “but” after “open debate”

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/assaults-on-free-speech-are-led-by-the-left-l2r8t9t9p
current thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3277408-David-Aaronovitch-comment-in-Times


"Index on Censorship is a nonprofit that campaigns for and defends free expression worldwide. We publish work by censored writers and artists, promote debate, and monitor threats to free speech.

We believe that everyone should be free to express themselves without fear of harm or persecution – no matter what their views.

Index’s aim is to raise awareness about threats to free expression and the value of free speech as the first step to tackling censorship."

www.indexoncensorship.org/what-we-do/

[Maryz]

LaContessa, we aren't allowed to say "who identifies as trans".

Quoting mnhq "Trans-identified' seems pretty goady - people generally don't identify as trans but as the opposite sex"

[DodoPatrol]

So how do MNHQ suggest we now explain what a transwoman is to someone who had the terminology mixed up and thought it MEANT natal female, without mentioning any word that means male?

Non-female person who may or may not present in stereotypically feminine way? Pseudo-female? Female impersonator? The second two of those avoid using any male terms but I would say ARE offensive, whereas MtF and female-identifying male seem just factual.

[WidowWadman]

Disturbingly orange. I'm a woman and a feminist - who are you to tell me that I shouldn't be on a feminist board?

It's really disturbing how the gender critical crowd over the past few years has worked hard to bite away anyone who doesn't subscribe to their brand of feminism, that tbh seems to be more concerned with policing womanhood, women's behaviour, dress and thoughts than actually with women's rights.
You don't own this place and have no right to tell anyone to leave just because you don't agree with them.

[womanformallyknownaswoman]

Then don't come here. Just like I don't frequent the trans boards on reddit because of the poisonous opinions of women, or the MRA boards, because what I would read there would make me feel disgust towards the male half of humanity.

Or perhaps like i don't go on the lesbian boards, because I'm not a lesbian, or the German boards because I'm not German.

This!! Some get a thrill from trashing women's spaces though - even sexually excited by it by all accounts

[OldmanOfTheWeb3]

"Trans-identified' seems pretty goady - people generally don't identify as trans but as the opposite sex"

I've used Trans-identified when discussing detransitioning in children. Without the term it becomes next to impossible to sensibly discuss this topic because you have to implicitly accept that a young child can be "trans" when what they are is identified as such. Trans is a self-imposed term. Trans-Identified refers to when the term is imposed by others (medical practitioners, parents, teachers, whoever).

It's necessary to discussing social contagion and related issues. Perhaps that's why TRAs want the term banned - because it implicitly acknowledges one can be called trans without being it.

[Scrumplestiltskin]

That could be impossible with these new rules.
Exactly, SarahConnor.
If we can't even define "transwoman" because it's not allowed to refer to a person's biological sex, then we are as good as gagged, bound, and shoved in a cupboard.
If we can't even explain what they are, and how they differ to us - females - then we're fucked.
An example: a transwoman comes onto a thread, and says "I don't see why having me in a swimming pool changing area is an issue, you're all just being bigoted." How do we respond if we can't refer to sex?
As a biological male, they have not been raised with the awareness that they are prey to the opposite sex. They have not received female socialisation that has taught them (the truth,) that male people view females (us) as objects and may predate upon us. They as males do not understand the fear, vulnerability, impotence, etc, that females experience. As males, they do not understand the female experience, they have not experienced it themselves, and that is why they don't see a problem with entering our spaces, with their penis and scrotum and male body, and being undressed around us while we are undressed.
All these things reference sex - and now we cannot do that.
We, on a site for MOTHERS, for god's sake, are being silenced in order to cater to the feelings of a fraction of a percentage of people - who are male.

[Baroquehavoc]

Without the term it becomes next to impossible to sensibly discuss this topic

That's the intention.

[DisturblinglyOrangeScrambleEgg]

Disturbingly orange. I'm a woman and a feminist - who are you to tell me that I shouldn't be on a feminist board?

I'm not - I'm not policing anyone's speech - fill your boots, talk as much as you like - I would say that it's a free board, but that's clearly not the case now.

It's my speech that's being curtailed.

My point is, that you have full control, if you find things I say offensive, you can stop reading them, just as i can yours.

[OldmanOfTheWeb3]

This is now being hailed as a victory, btw, by the same TRAs who try to provoke people on Twitter to get them banned.

[DisturblinglyOrangeScrambleEgg]

This is now being hailed as a victory, btw, by the same TRAs who try to provoke people on Twitter to get them banned.

Pretty sure when you're censoring people's speech, telling them what words they can and can't use to speak the truth, forcing them to hide the truth, that that really does make you facist.

[Lottapianos]

Shelagh Fogarty will be talking about this issue on LBC radio this afternoon at 3pm. I will listen to as much as I can but may not be able to hear the whole thing, so this is a heads up for anyone who is interested

[Scrumplestiltskin]

Here's an idea: how about trans allies and trans people who don't want to have sex referenced, have their own "TA" marked posts on feminism chat and we stay the hell off, and those of us who are open to debate and want to talk about trans issues in a way that references sex have "GC" marked threads and people who would be offended by sex being referenced stay the hell off.
Not perfect, but then at least everyone has a space here, and no one is restricted?

[loveyouradvice]

*I do still believe in Justine's commitment to free speech...." .... I do not know what is going on here and find some recent comments really worrying....

BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE WE ARE GOING TO BE THROWN UNDER THE BUS.... AND THAT WE NEED TO GIVE MUMSNET A CHANCE - while discussing the issues in our normal feisty and outspoken way. IT IS ABSOLUTELY CRUCIAL THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DISCUSS ISSUES ON HERE with the eye of the world on us.

They have said:

• they will be moderating in a flexible way to start with .... it is going to be very tough for them, and I think they will let spirited debate stand but not personal attacks.... and I do not believe they will come down hard on people misgendering on AIBU etc, as they will be fully aware that most people will not have read the guidelines... and that it is inappropriate to apply strict rules on this but not on so many other issues discussed in a feisty and often very inappropriate/derogatory fashion on AIBU
  
• I think they have also said several things they don't mean in the way it is being interpreted... I am confident we can discuss genitals, just not in an offensive way... I am confident we can discuss natal sex where it is relevant to the argument
  

HOWEVER TWO THINGS DO CONCERN ME:

• Mumsnet initial explanation for not being able to use TIM was that no one identifies into Transgender : I'm not sure this is strictly true, but am prepared to accept this. They did NOT say it was because it included the term male... so I am very surprised this is now an issue
  
• They have not come up with an acceptable term for transpeople born with a penis that does not involve the word woman... though many posters have come up with good suggestions
  

WE CAN DO IT.... WE CAN STAY ON MUMSNET and discuss things and peaktrans people - WE HAVE TO.... I am with Datun in saying that to be heard by the largest number of voices we need to be pragmatic in how we approach this... THE FUTURE OF GIRLS AND WOMEN depends on this....

[PenguindreamsofDraco]

What would be wrong with Man Who Identifies As A Woman (or vice versa)? If according to MN they are identifying as the opposite sex, how can that offend?