It's a sad day when pie has power on mn

[Floorplan]

Why not just engage @mnhq

even the creeps who prefer pre pubescent kids

Well guess what, it was that group I was talking about. Don't pretend they are vanishingly small. Why would child porn exist if there weren't people like that. There is enough adult porn fGS. People don't target kids just to get power over them though of course some do. Sexual maturityhappens well before 16 physically. Some people would be happy to consider like I say an unnatural pool of 13 ups with children's bodies . I believe the law is less harsh than it is with actual under 10s for example.

You can call me cis when I’m an isomer or in proximity to the gene element I’m controlling.

And in no other circumstances whatsoever, thank you.

So if they get caught it's 1 y not 5y. Although it should be life it's the real world we are in.

That said, it’s clear that most trans people find the use of pronouns or names that they or others have consciously rejected, to be hurtful and would therefore struggle to engage in a discussion with those who insist on using them. The same is true of the expression ‘Trans-Identified Male’ or ‘TIM’. Likewise, many feminists are affronted by the term ‘cis’ and ‘terf’, so using these terms will make civil debate less likely. As we’ve said, context is everything – but it’s likely that going forward our moderation team will delete these expressions.

From the guidelines at the top of the page.

Please do not use the term "cis" when asked not to. This is uncivil behaviour. It is against the guidelines and doing it three times within a six week period may lead to withdrawal of posting privileges.

maryz no, you are correct.

Cross sex hormones do NOT produce a ‘normal’ puberty of the opposite sex.

Puberty is vital for correct physical and mental development. No one has any idea of what the long term consequences of this truly are. Apart from the obvious ones which are sterility, cognitive damage of roughly 8-10 IQ points, osteoporosis, joint damage, endocrine damage, cardiovascular damage, metabolic damage...

There is no medically ethical justification for doing this to healthy children. None. At. All.

I didn't think so, Bowl. But sometimes I get very confused and start to wonder if the earth really is flat (and populated by 6,000 year old dinosaurs).

It's hard to imagine that child abuse would slip through the gaps and not be noticed by someone says YourFriendlyNeighbourhood Trans

The ignorance behind that disgusting statement is unbelievable.

Go and educate yourself about the activities of Myles Bradbury, Larry Nasser, Matthew Falder, Rotherham, Oxford, Rochdale, Telford and on and on and on - and then come back and tell us that we've got it wrong.

This thread seems to have devolved into arguing about my use of the word cis to refer to those who aren't trans. So I'm going to post this last response and stop reading.

You guys spend so much time calling trans women what you believe them to be and arguing about our right to self identify as women, even though we very clearly state we don't like being called men. Yet in the very next sentence you argue that your self identification matters, and you don't identify as cis - so we should all respect that and not call you cis.

I'm afraid you can't have this both ways. Either you respect what people want to be called and will call them that - in which case call me a woman from now on and I'll stop calling you cis.

Or you accept that sometimes people disagree with the labels we think apply to us and respect their right to do so - in which case I will not ask that you call me a woman nor will I tell you you're wrong and demand pronouns and labels. But this must go both ways, and you must also respect my right to disagree with your self identification and apply labels to you you don't like too.

The ball is in your court.

Message to everyone on the thread

A cynical person might think that the derailment of this thread by reference to trans issues could be a deliberate policy and an attempt to have the thread deleted.

Just a thought.

I'm afraid you can't have this both ways. Either you respect what people want to be called and will call them that - in which case call me a woman from now on and I'll stop calling you cis.

If you cannot stick to the topic - please do stop reading.

Not everything is about Trans. Get over it.

Either you respect what people want to be called and will call them that - in which case call me a woman from now on and I'll stop calling you cis.

People are pointing out the guidelines of this forum to you. On FWR, "we" are not allowed to call you "men" and "you" are not allowed to call us "cis".

Call me what you like elsewhere: I genuinely couldn't care less! These guidelines count here, however, and are MN''s attempt to mediate between the two perspectives. To post here, I'm afraid you'll have to abide by them just like everybody else has to.

Wise words Maryzsnewaccount Thank you.

I've just come on to reiterate the hugely important points made by LangCleg above

Any dilution of safeguarding will inevitably lead to abuses. Transactivism within schools is diluting safeguarding. The motives of those leading this may be pure as the driven snow but nevertheless it still needs to stop as a matter of urgency because it's putting vulnerable children at risk.

The reason why we have so many major safeguarding failures and scandals in this country is because safeguarding and its weak points are sensitive topics that are typically censored and silenced. That silence is what allows abuse to happen. We have to be allowed to talk about this.

Teachers are required - REQUIRED - to undertake safeguarding training every year. That training emphasises that no child's disclosure can be kept secret and teachers must report disclosures to the safeguarding officer.

The notion that some councils have already sent out 'guidance' to schools telling them that "some" disclosures can be kept secret is astonishing.

Not to mention this is a fundamental misunderstanding of how child abusers work. I mean, it's not like kids below 16 aren't going through puberty already and despite that are still targets for abusers.

No, I don't think it is. They're attracted to pre-pubescents, that's why they target children and lose interest once the child matures into teenagehood.

Ergo the current trend for over-prescribing puberty blockers (see other thread currently going on this) is something that is no doubt being welcomed by PIE members, who, by the way, also describe themselves as "youth liberators".

Either you respect what people want to be called and will call them that - in which case call me a woman from now on and I'll stop calling you cis. The only person using banned terminology on this thread is you. On the fucking fwr board.

It's hard to imagine that child abuse would slip through the gaps and not be noticed by someone

And this has to be one of the most naive (if not intentionally misleading) comments I've ever read. Because social services, medics, police etc have never missed an opportunity to protect a vulnerable child, have they? You ever heard of Baby P? Victoria Climbie? Ayeeshia-Jayne Smith? Rochdale? Shall I go on?

It's hard to imagine that child abuse would slip through the gaps and not be noticed by someone

My goodness. Really? How do you think child abuse happens? Abusers don’t just pick on kids whom no one cares about- they groom the child, they groom their families and the people around the child.

Children in loving attentive families are abused. Look at that case in the USA with the gymnastics team doctor - all those parents believed they were doing the right thing sending their girls to the top team doc. Imagine how those parents feel now - they were groomed too and their children abused.

Abusers will use ANY loophole, any weakness in safeguarding. They will take years to manoeuvre into positions of trust. They will train for specific jobs to get positions of trust.

This is WHY we have safeguarding guidelines in the first place - to put systems in place to prevent access, to prevent abuse. Anyone, for any reason, whether it’s a terrible purpose or a seemingly noble one, who dilutes it threatens these safeguarding frameworks needs to be challenged.

Right now we have a lot of people being very naive about what changes to the GRA and self id will mean. Most of those people will either be completely ignorant of safeguarding, not have thought it through and not be doing it deliberately to harm anyone.

But regardless of motive, what matters is outcome. And that outcome will not be positive.

Either you respect what people want to be called and will call them that in which case call me a woman from now on and I'll stop calling you cis

Now that you have taken for yourselves all the words that used to apply to our half of the human population the only words left to describe us are the pejoratives you use on us when we tell you no.

I do not think this is a coincidence. ciswhorebitchcuntslut is all you give us, which tells us everything we need to know about you.

It's hard to imagine that child abuse would slip through the gaps and not be noticed by someone
Santana warned us all that those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

This is so terrifying and hard to understand that I just can’t process it all, despite how vitally important it is. I have so much respect for those of you who engage and research and share information.

Anyone, for any reason, whether it’s a terrible purpose or a seemingly noble one, who dilutes it threatens these safeguarding frameworks needs to be challenged.

This. And if you (generic you) regard such challenges as an affront to your (generic your) noble purpose, then the problem is with you, not the people challenging you.

This goes for the Society of Soap Opera Addicts, trans lobby groups and any other group advocating for the dilution of safeguarding frameworks.

It's hard to imagine that child abuse would slip through the gaps and not be noticed by someone

In my (not irrelevant) experience, child abuse is endemic and the occasions when it is noticed and appropriate action taken to stop it are the exception rather than the rule.

In my (not irrelevant) experience, child abuse is endemic and the occasions when it is noticed and appropriate action taken to stop it are the exception rather than the rule.

Indeed. And they aren't all interested in pre-pubescent children, as some hereabouts seem determined to pretend.

Safeguarding covers all minors, as does CSA/CSE.

I asked MNHQ if the title of this thread could be expanded to read ‘Paedophile Information Exchange', (with the consent is the OP of course). As I had no idea what ‘pie’ meant and think many others won’t either. It is too important an issue to be misunderstood and so possibly scrolled past.

MN replied, “We're a bit wary about changing the title as it may attract the wrong sort to Mumsnet. Hope you understand“

I genuinely don’t understand. What does that mean? I asked MNHQ but have had no reply.

They think it'll bring the paedophiles on here.