Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

MNHQ make a statement on Twitter re FWR

524 replies

GirlDownUnder · 12/10/2019 04:04

mobile.twitter.com/MumsnetTowers/status/1182615292813467648

Mumsnet will always stand in solidarity with minority communities. We don’t tolerate transphobic comments and will delete any when they are flagged to us. But we do also believe strongly in free speech. 1/3

The discussion of gender self-id and what that might mean for very hard-won women’s rights, as well as the rapidly growing number of children exploring gender identity issues, is contentious. 2/3

We know some people would like us to simply censor this entire debate but a similar number think we censor too much. We’re committed to allowing respectful discussion of an issue that is of particular interest to parents. 3/3

The usual suspects pile on, but I think the ratios look very good.

MNHQ Gin Flowers

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 13/10/2019 17:47

Saw this on Twitter and thought it was quite funny now own up how many of you look like this?

Why can't that person be a mother?

Campervan69 · 13/10/2019 17:52

Also my brother sent me screenshots of a very funny conversation he had seen by minnymum who I am apparently blocked by despite not even knowing who she is. She's been trying to say that Mumsnet are lying about having 12 million unique users and that it's more like 1 million but somebody pointed out in the comments to her that the company she'd used to come up with this information was just guessing. The only people who would have that information are Mumsnet themselves and this person points out to her that it's very unlikely that Mumsnet would be lying however she has not taken down her tweet. Mumsnet is truly under attack by these people.

MNHQ make a statement on Twitter re FWR
CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 13/10/2019 17:56

She just really really wants some kind of sign that what she is doing is bringing down mumsnet.

I'm sure we've all done similar, although probably not well into adulthood.

stealthsquirrelnutkin · 13/10/2019 18:24

KKR’s portfolio...they own tons of stuff ...hoping someone a bit more savvy than me can identify more UK brands we can boycott to show British women value free speech.

I didn't scroll very far down the list, but I did notice several pharmaceutical companies, a paediatric clinic and a surgical business. The theory that someone much higher up has decided that it would be worth taking a hit on the bread lubricant business in an attempt to silence uppity women might not be completely unfounded.

Ereshkigal · 13/10/2019 20:28

Why can't that person be a mother?

Indeed, some internalised anti trans prejudice there I think!

justasking111 · 13/10/2019 22:34

I do not often say this, but I wish the media would pick up on this story. A big splash in the Daily Mail would do nicely just now. I wish I used flora so that I could give it up now.

justasking111 · 13/10/2019 22:44

From Upfield spokesman.

"The next day the firm released a statement telling its customers: 'We've investigated. We are wholly committed to our values, which include treating everyone equally, so have made the decision to no longer work with Mumsnet.' "

"A spokesman for Upfield said: 'We are wholly committed to our values which includes treating everyone equally. We feel more could be done to moderate online discussion and tackle discriminatory posts.' "

But they are not treating everyone equally, they are putting us back in the kitchen where they perceive we belong.

Bet they believe they should go home at night to a woman who to quote Jerry Halls mother

""to keep a man, you must be a maid in the living room, a cook in the kitchen and a whore in the bedroom"?"

justasking111 · 13/10/2019 22:48

As to the spokesman, I guess it would be one of these four gentlemen.

beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09521994/officers

I guess we could write to them??

TheCatsServant · 13/10/2019 23:15

Another big thank you MN from a shy lurker. I've learnt so much from this site and find it one of the only places where I'm "mingling" with women who think like me.

I hate Flora... nasty synthetic taste. They've really shot themselves in the foot with their absurd anti women kneejerk reaction. And if the report about it containing palm oil is accurate, I now have a double whammy of reasons to encourage people to boycott it..

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 14/10/2019 03:16

Saw this on Twitter and thought it was quite funny now own up how many of you look like this?

Not sure if that person is deeply confused or lying, but either way, becoming a bit better acquainted with reality would probably improve their life in all kinds of ways.

TruthOnTrial · 14/10/2019 03:26

so have made the decision to no longer work with Mumsnet

So, I have made the decision to ban Flora from our household. It shall be a swear word in our home.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 14/10/2019 03:38

Join the butter revolution!

Honestly, even if I wasn't firmly GC and a lover of butter I think this might make me stop buying Flora just because who are a margarine company to be telling a parenting site what can and cannot be discussed on their platform?

TruthOnTrial · 14/10/2019 04:15

I do think it's a little lacking imagination that so much of that thread is about the word but

Its almost like they can't conceive of women being able to juggle two controversially conflicting topics

Would this be mysogyny to hold these beliefs about women?

There's also abject denial of any womans voice, and thst there are many trans friends come and share on these threads

I don't think any trans would feel welcome if they were all hated

Also, soooo much name-calling. Its like a playground but more sinister with talk of bins on fire.

I dont think they would find any of that sort of talk on here, then again wr don't tolerate nonsense like cis. I am woman, and not to be measured against anything else.

Durgasarrow · 14/10/2019 05:42

Who is the genius that called a food "Flora" ? When I heard that name all I could think of was "Intestinal Flora"

DoctorTwo · 14/10/2019 06:49

Saw this on Twitter and thought it was quite funny now own up how many of you look like this?

Blimey @Campervan69 that looks exactly like me! Shock :o

I truly hope none of you looks like that, it's bad enough for me.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 14/10/2019 07:08

Meant to make you think of flowers maybe? That's an odd mental association for a neutral tasting fat that people will be putting on their sandwiches - bacon and flower butty, egg and flower sandwich.

boatyardblues · 14/10/2019 07:49

It’s the sunflower oil connection - in the 80s the Flora packaging was plastered in suunflowers.

Candidpeel · 14/10/2019 08:47

Thats interesting on SH's case against MN.....

It sounds like SH is maybe saying that MN is allowing hate speech by allowing users to say that TW without a GRC are still male and therefore still men.

Legally, in terms of the Equality Act they are considered women (but they can still be excluded from women only services, sports etc... by the exemptions that allow discrimination in these limited cases on the basis of gender reassignment).

Because of course, in reality they are not women, and having a GRC does not mean that other people must pretend to perceive someone as a member of the opposite sex to the one they really are.

There are strong but limited confidentiality provisions in the GRA -- if a someone in an official capacity has access to information about a person's GRC status (i.e. that they have one or in the process of applying for one) they are not allowed to share this information.

This is NOT a general prohibition against 'deadnaming' or 'misgendering' .....people who know that someone is a man (because its obvious, because the person transitioned in the public eye, because the person is out and and proud about being trans etc.... ) remain free to remark on that fact.

Ereshkigal · 14/10/2019 08:59

It sounds like SH is maybe saying that MN is allowing hate speech by allowing users to say that TW without a GRC are still male and therefore still men.

Do you mean the MTF trans people with a GRC? I think that's Hayden's contention and makes more sense with what you say afterwards.

The EHRC states in guidance that MTF trans people without a GRC are legally male for the purposes of the EA. So it is difficult to see how repeating this legal position could be seen as actionable hate speech.

I remember there was a former (banned now I think) poster who had the opinion that we were in "contempt of court" for calling MTFs with GRC biological males as people with a GRC had had their legal sex changed by the GRA panel and refusing to respect this was a crime.

Candidpeel · 14/10/2019 09:00

oops --- i mean "TW WITH a GRC are still male and therefore still men"

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 14/10/2019 09:00

I thought contempt of court only applied if you were actually in a court at the time...

Ereshkigal · 14/10/2019 09:02

I don't think anyone here gave any credence to what that poster said, I just thought it was interesting in the light of Hayden's comments.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 14/10/2019 09:06

I'm mostly wondering about the thought process behind declaring comments on a web forum in contempt of court. How does that person think courts work exactly? Is this like the Sovereign Citizen guys and their belief that if they write their name in all caps they don't have to pay taxes?

TruthOnTrial · 14/10/2019 11:21

Of course contempt of court is for court proceedings! How contemptible.

Saw this on Twitter and thought it was quite funny now own up how many of you look like this?

Not me either. Who is this random who's being held up as every MN poster? Grin

Also, apparently we're all tye same person too, going by the commentary around checking ip addresses.

Also, MN don't actively monitor. They rely on TRAs users to report posts that transgress TGs.

They make this clear.

Us women over here are managing ourselves.

So that would mean taking millions to court Grin