Use of trans identified male as opposed to transwoman No2.

[happydappy2]

MNHQ There has been much written recently about how the controlling of the words we use, is very misleading. Many women reject the word transwoman as it can be misunderstood. In light of this, would you reconsider yr guidelines that Trans Identified Male can not be used? It would seem a more factually accurate description of a human male who presents in a stereotypically female way. Thank you.

That's great that you've clarified that debate is very welcome here, thanks

Err...... way to miss and twist what I said lol, but that's no surprise on these threads any more

How come? Why aren't you all using trans identifying female? Surely you don't want to confuse people by talking about transmen?

Fair point. I'm trying to post within existing TGs, but I agree, 'woman identifying as trans' would be more accurate.

& yep, the toilet thing is a derail.

Wow, that's us told we're reading things wrong to how most (presumably you mean normal?) people would read things then, isn't it.

Ha. Ha.

This endless twisting of words is hilarious really.

& yep, the toilet thing is a derail.

It wasn't Decomposers who brought loos into it though! She was commenting on somebody else who brought it up first.
So if toilets were a derail for being mentioned, surely it was them derailing?!
I mean WTF. It's not derailing to be disagreed with.

For the record, you added in your own 'normal' strawman there. Which can clearly be seen.

I meant more along the lines of, if people are looking to read things a certain way, then they will (similar to the faux 'omg, the OP is saying we should ban the word transwoman stuff earlier, when you could technically read it that way, but the actual wording of the OP clarified that was not the case, but we still had to do the dance). If people just read the words posters write, then they see what the poster actually meant.

This endless twisting of words is hilarious really
You're not kidding, see mine that got it above.

That's how it read. What did you mean by most people don't then?

I mean WTF. It's not derailing to be disagreed with.

I do agree with you there. De-railing would be continually taking the thread away from its topic purposely, while others were trying to discuss the actual thread topic.

I have done a lot of derailing in here actually by answering stuff that is probably best left unanswered. I will stop that now actually as..my self awareness has just kicked in and I can't twist of derailers when doing it myself!

Have Mumsnet responded to the request?

Sorry, cross post with yours - fair enough then if that's what you meant.

It was FlyingOink who started posting about toilets and their presence making some women leave the toilets when they saw them in there so maybe ask them why the brought it up?

No FlyingOink was replying to SuePerbly’s post made Yesterday at 23:42 (as was I):

“F) Finally, this is in no way just about protecting women's spaces and rights. If it was, concerns would be regularly expressed about trans men, who may pass incredibly well, scaring natal women in public spaces. As natal women could reasonably believe that the trans man possesses a penis, if he "passes" well. Yet concerns about the impact of trans men in women's spaces is never raised.”

The level of gaslighting of those who wish to police women’s language is off the scale, they make posts, people respond to them and say ‘but this not about that issue’ (as I did) they then continue to try to derail by talking about the issue. When called out on it they claim it wasn’t one of them that brought it up in the first place, even though it is clearly on the thread for all to see. I see no point in responding to them anymore as they do not seem capable of responding for more than a post or two without resorting to that sort of nonsense. I think it is obviously because they have no actual arguments as all their arguments have been easily disputed.

Someone a few pages back had an analogy spot on, something along the lines of
'I don't go to the pub to play darts. I go to have fun with my friends and have sunday lunch'
'OMG you want to ban darts, you dont want anyone to play darts, why do you hate darts?!'

Yes that was a great analogy.

Eresh, you are not the only regular on FWR, and not every general comment about FWR refers to you specifically.

Some regular posters on FWR now openly state that they do not welcome debate or dissenting views.

That is a new thing in FWR, but it’s been happening on and off for at least the past month. This is a good thing because at least now when, on the main boards, posters say they have hidden FWR because it’s hostile to non GC feminists, we don’t have to play the “we welcome all viewpoints, no one is being shouted down” game all over again.

You personally can say it doesn’t apply to you, and claim neutrality whilst continuing to roll out “derailment”.

I think it is obviously because they have no actual arguments as all their arguments have been easily disputed.

I agree.

De-railing would be continually taking the thread away from its topic purposely, while others were trying to discuss the actual thread topic

Decomposer got told off for bringing toilets into it and derailing though, when all she was doing was responding to a comment already made!
If there wasn't all the cries of "derail" or saying someone's brought something up/gone off topic when they hadn't, the thread wouldn't get so bogged down (no pun intended)!
OMG lol

Yes
Well said @WhoopDeFuckingDo

Some regular posters on FWR now openly state that they do not welcome debate or dissenting views.

No. They said they don't come to FWR for debate but for other things. And they don't want to deal with people they perceive as deliberately derailing.

No FlyingOink was replying to SuePerbly’s post made Yesterday at 23:42 (as was I)

OK, thread was that long missed the Sue bit.
Genuine missed it.
Going by some logic on here though FlyingOink and yourself shouldn;t have commented on it as talking about toilets is derailing

Have Mumsnet responded to the request?

Twice. Firstly, to say they would have a conversation in the office about it. Secondly to say they would have a conversation in the office about so bear with them!

I haven’t rtft but I am reflecting that the term trans identifying male is far more accurate.
And if they can call us CIS, we can refer to them as TIMs.

“we welcome all viewpoints''
Even assuming those few posters genuinely do want nodebate, there are thousands of posters on FWR, so yes, those who welcome debate will conitnue to say they do so, and it will not be a lie just because apparently some others don't. Posters are individuals, oddly enough.
no one is being shouted down
That one I find laughable though, as..those who use it seem to think getting a lot of replies to a minority opinion they post is 'being shouted down'. Nah, its just having a minority opinion, happens to us all..or I would think so. has happened to me loads..but I still carry on posting my views and do not take getting more than one reply as some kind of gang attack or whatever

(Yes I am still derailing..argh)

You can't say the C word on here (good 'cos I don't particularly like it either)
if they brought back the other one they'd no doubt bring back all banned words.
If they did though, hopefully threads wouldn't descend into "don't call me c*s" arguments.
It'd work both ways

Ah! Thank you, lang

I don't think it matters that enormously if a thread goes off topic, FWIW. It's a thing that happens on t'internet.

But anyway. Is anyone disagreeing with the OP's suggestion?

I get that some posters would, for various reasons, prefer to use different terminology to others - but does anyone want MN to retain the existing list of banned words/phrases?

Sorry if someone's already said: 'Yes, I do' & I've missed it...

You can't say the C word on here..

Capitalism?

It'd work both ways

Pretty sure most here understand that freedom to define terms would apply to all.