Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Can we stop being obedient soon, or will this coercion continue for evermore?

2 replies

theOtherPamAyres · 25/05/2019 23:14

I know that Mumsnet moderators are hot on keeping respectful debate and for that reason does not allow misgendering, certain terms, and the like. It's their site and they make the rules and I respect that. This topic isn't about Mumsnet, it's about the growing confidence of feminists to refuse to use the terms and language of gender.

Karen Ingala Smith, speaking to the Womens Select Committee, showed how it could be done. As a result of the clarity of her language, she was able to cut through the nonsense and make her points forcefully. In contrast, Janet from Womens Aid, with her convoluted language about gender, sounded confused and muddle-headed.

When we are forced to use words like 'transwoman' and 'she' - for fear of prosecution, civil actions, job losses, imprisonment for contempt of court, exclusion, abuse and physical assaults - we have helped to normalise transgenderism. In effect, we are saying that a man can be a woman.

I believe that we can no longer support Trans Rights by default, by caving in and going with the flow. At some stage we have to assert the right to use our own terms - because we can't wait for legal precedents and government reviews. The more refusniks and recusants there are, the more confidence will grow.

What tips and tricks of language did you start using when you could no longer kowtow to the demand for obedience?
How did you write or speak about people/men/women who identify as trans? (Did you see what I did there?)

SophieLMumsnet · 26/05/2019 11:11

We deleted Barracker's reported post because we felt the comparison between the use of female pronouns for transwomen and rohypnol - a date rape drug - just wasn't in the spirit. We've been in touch with Barracker off the boards.

MichaelMumsnet · 28/05/2019 13:26

Hi all,
Apologies for the delay on coming back to everyone about this. We're still catching up with everything after the Bank Holiday weekend and wanted to discuss this properly in the office before we got back to you with an update.

We've discussed this thread extensively at MNHQ and we've decided to roll back on the post deletion. You'll hopefully be pleased to hear we're also going to lift the suspension on Barracker's account today as a result (edit - see above).

To clarify, this was only ever a temporary suspension and it wasn't solely as a result of this one post. We don't feel it's fair to go into our dealings with any individual poster in public, but we did feel we should make clear that the post in itself wasn't an immediate banning offence, as there seems to be a bit of concern about whether our guidelines have changed. They haven't. The temporary suspension we issued was influenced by other factors, too.

With regards to the post deletion, the moderators at work at the time felt that the mention of rohypnol might have been a sweeping negative generalisation about trans issues, and we can see why the post was read that way by some of our users. Having read all your thoughts on the thread and looked at the post again specifically in the context of the opening post, we agree that it didn't break talk guidelines.

We've been in touch with Barracker to let her know separately but we're sure she will get a warm welcome back. We hope that's answered any questions but do drop us a line if not. Thanks again for all the correspondence about it over the weekend and for your patience while we came to a decision.
MNHQ

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates

End of posts

There are no more MNHQ posts on this thread