Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Another one hiding in plain sight? Dr Bruce Hensel

174 replies

SunsetBeetch · 14/11/2019 18:10

twitter.com/Sseltse/status/1194987547002359813?s=19

Bruce Hensel, Former NBC chief medical correspondent, and prominent trans rights campaigner arrested for asking 9-year-old for sexually explicit photos!

#inplainsght #safeguarding #brucehensel t.co/3mqUaFn478

nypost.com/2019/11/14/ex-nbc-correspondent-bruce-hensel-arrested-for-asking-9-year-old-for-sexual-photos/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

abc7.com/amp/ex-tv-medical-correspondent-arrested-by-lapd-juvenile-division/5624361/?__twitter_impression=true

Dr. Bruce Hensel, an Emmy-winning former television medical correspondent in Los Angeles and New York, was arrested today for allegedly asking a 9-year-old girl to send him sexually suggestive photos.

t.co/51vYH7lHeX

twitter.com/PatriotAM1150/status/1195038649810923520?s=19

OP posts:
vickyjgo · 18/11/2019 09:43

There is no evidencethaet this person is trans or has done anything more than make a documentary on trans people. This thread explicitly tries to link this person being a "trans activist" to them being a peadophile. This is harmful to all trans people. This thread tries to make trans people guilty by association.

vickyjgo · 18/11/2019 09:46

It is also fascinating to try to understand how you think any trans person is trying to undermine children's safety. Many trans people have children and are aware of the current rules around how safeguarding works. Nothing in the proposed changes to the GRA affects any of these safeguards.

WotchaTalkinBoutWillis · 18/11/2019 09:48

Exactly vicky. Some won't see it though or accept what they're doing as is evident from comments.

PreseaCombatir · 18/11/2019 09:50

I'm not surprised MN aren't getting back with "what did I do?!" emails when even when someone attempts to answer you get twisty responses like florals!

So you’re saying that you agree with MnHQ not letting me know why I was deleted, and the reason for this is that you disagree with what another, entirely separate from me, poster is saying to you?
Righty Ho, brilliant, infallible logic. 🃏

FloralBunting · 18/11/2019 09:51

Well, I didn't think you'd be along quite so quickly to underline that you really do believe you can open a door on a submarine and keep the water out, but thanks for the swift responses.

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 18/11/2019 09:52

Nothing in the proposed changes to the GRA affects any of these safeguards.

Removing the CGC process which has in the past, stopped peadophiles getting a CRC to shower with young girls is breaking down safeguarding.

It's removing a safeguard which prevents someone dodgy getting in.

LangCleg · 18/11/2019 09:52

I see this thread is so dangerous it's going to need filibustering!

Anyway. MNHQ - is there an addition to the rules? Did you misunderstand to whom the monitors refers? Is it possible to discuss the mechanics of safeguarding, on this, your parenting website?

LangCleg · 18/11/2019 09:55

It's removing a safeguard which prevents someone dodgy getting in.

This - blindingly obvious - point seems to be going over a lot of heads. None so blind as those who won't see, dontchaknow. Priorities, priorities.

Protecting reputation as a priority over safeguarding protocols? Oh! Look! Another bloody red flag! It's like a bunting shop.

WotchaTalkinBoutWillis · 18/11/2019 09:55

Well, I didn't think you'd be along quite so quickly to underline that you really do believe you can open a door on a submarine and keep the water out, but thanks for the swift responses

Confused Grin I see this thread is so dangerous it's going to need filibustering!

Yes. Yes, anyone disagreeing and/or offering an explanation is automatically a filibuster. If you say so. Grin Hmm
These threads are bonkers.

PreseaCombatir · 18/11/2019 09:56

Also, I’m not claiming that all trans people are trying to undermine children’s safety.
What I am saying is that it appears to me that children’s safety is being undermined as direct result of trans people wanting less bureaucracy in changing their legal gender. And that some trans people seem to see this as acceptable collateral damage in being able to get what they want.
You do understand the difference between the two, don’t you?
I’d also say there are some trans people who would obviously want to undermine children’s safety as some trans people are sexually predators. We know this because there are some trans people imprisoned for sexual violence. Unless you’re saying with a straight face that, by virtue of being trans, someone is definitely NOT a sexual predator?

WotchaTalkinBoutWillis · 18/11/2019 09:59

So you’re saying that you agree with MnHQ not letting me know why I was deleted, and the reason for this is that you disagree with what another, entirely separate from me, poster is saying to you?

No, I'm saying that even when people say what the problem probably is, it's "no, no it's not" with a side order of gaslighting.
I appreciate it's not you that did that one, but all I'm saying is I can totally see why MN don't always give a reason if they're faced with stuff like that.

RuffleCrow · 18/11/2019 09:59

I think if these are the kinds of things MN is now deleting it's pretty clear the site's original purpose has been reversed. Time for a boycott?

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 18/11/2019 10:00

The gate keeping is there for a reason:

www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/6B5F217162ABD9B3189F2EB82787034E/S1758320900012695a.pdf/gender_reassignment_5_years_of_referrals_in_oxfordshire.pdf

This study shows that it works, here out of 39 people 2 were rejected for a GRC for being peadophiles...

This is why we have been safe for 8 years, were have gatekeepers.

PreseaCombatir · 18/11/2019 10:03

No, I'm saying that even when people say what the problem probably is, it's "no, no it's not" with a side order of gaslighting.
I appreciate it's not you that did that one, but all I'm saying is I can totally see why MN don't always give a reason if they're faced with stuff like that.

So, yes then. If you’re deleted for ‘breaking rules’ you should be able to be told what rules you’ve broken. And if you disagree you should be able to state why you disagree. Do you agree with, on principle, the right to appeal? It’s the same thing.
I can’t believe in this day and age someone would disagree with these principles with a straight face. Totalitarianism isn’t a good look.

LangCleg · 18/11/2019 10:03

a side order of gaslighting

This is how you describe a critique of a political movement based on queer theory, which explicitly advocates for and celebrates the subversion of boundaries, as inimical to child safeguarding, which is based on the upholding of boundaries?

Thanks for being so open about it.

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 18/11/2019 10:04

The person in the op isn't trans, he's jumping of the activism because he's a peodophile and removing the GRC gatekeeping means he will get easier access to girls.

Currently he will be refused a Gender recognition certificate, because he's a peadophile, with self ID that check won't be there.

It's not fucking rocket science.

WotchaTalkinBoutWillis · 18/11/2019 10:06

This is how you describe a critique of a political movement based on queer theory

No, I'm saying what floral said to vicky was a side order of gaslighting if you look back.

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 18/11/2019 10:07

I hope that answers your question Vicky

LangCleg · 18/11/2019 10:15

This is where I stand:

Nobody's rights, protections, set asides or provisions are as important as child safeguarding.

Nobody's.

In that, I include women's rights, gay rights, and - horror of horrors - trans rights.

I don't give a flying fuck which lobby group's materials include the dilution of child safeguarding. I'll oppose any and all.

Want me to stop moaning about extremist genderist lobby groups and their materials? Well I will. The second they remove any dilution of child safeguarding. Want me to stop arguing the toss with the genderists hereabouts? Well I will. The second they stop defending materials and groups that dilute child safeguarding.

Simples.

HebeMumsnet · 18/11/2019 10:25

Morning, everyone.

We've been having another look at the deleted posts that are being discussed here and we have reinstated three posts (and rescinded the relevant strikes). If yours was one of them we will be in touch this morning to let you know.

As we often say, these are really difficult threads to moderate, which is why we appreciate that sometimes it can also be difficult to post within the guidelines, so we're always happy to take a second look at deleted posts and explain why they were deleted or reconsider.

Just to shed a bit of light on the reasons why these posts were deleted originally: they did all come very close to being 'negative generalisations'. While we have taken on board the explanations given here and now understand that posters were referring only to very small and specific groups of people, rather than the trans community in general, and in other cases were referring not to the trans community at all but to paedophiles, when that isn't made crystal clear, posts do risk deletion. Referring generally to 'they' or 'these people' does mean posts are easily misread both by those reporting and those moderating, and that seems to be where the misunderstanding arose here.

As we said, we've reinstated those three posts now and we know it is tricky but if everyone can try to be as clear as possible in discussions like this, not just for us as we moderate, but for everyone reading and lurking, that would be a huge help and hopefully will avoid this happening too often.

Thanks again to everyone who took the time to post here or to drop us messages about the issue. We do appreciate it.

LangCleg · 18/11/2019 10:32

THANK YOU Hebe.

Aaarrgghhh · 18/11/2019 10:37

As we said, we've reinstated those three posts now and we know it is tricky but if everyone can try to be as clear as possible in discussions like this, not just for us as we moderate, but for everyone reading and lurking, that would be a huge help and hopefully will avoid this happening too often.

Wait. Are you suggesting it’s posters fault for not being clear enough? Come on now, a bit of common sense is needed here. Sounds a bit like victim blaming to me. Almost as if to say it’s our fault that our posts were deleted unfairly even though we all try to explain in as much detail to avoid breaking guidelines. It’s very clear what those comments meant and people deliberately reading more into it are the ones in the wrong, not those commenting.

PreseaCombatir · 18/11/2019 10:41

The thing is, this bloke isn’t even trans. So why would anyone automatically assume I was referring to trans people when saying ‘these people’?

LangCleg · 18/11/2019 10:44

now understand that posters were referring only to very small and specific groups of people, rather than the trans community in general

Without wishing to be ungracious, Hebe, I am going to have to say that if you don't recognise or understand the common lingo used on your boards, how can you successfully moderate them?

I think the team does need some remedial work in this regard - Justine keeps telling us how much resource you expend on this part of the site so it's somewhat concerning when things you say illustrate that you're still entirely unaware of the dynamics, the external players involved and the various nicknames and slang terms frequently used.

Sorry - but y'know. Please take this on board. It's knackering, all this having to have endless threads pointing out the basics.

FloralBunting · 18/11/2019 10:44

Thank you Hebe. Now that my post has returned, I shall leave others to decide if I've been unclear in terming those that monitor the site to stop certain discussions 'monitors'.

It is ever so slightly rich to be slapping my wrist for not being clear enough when the guidelines that have been put in place enforce convoluted, complicated phrasing and I really don't think I should be held responsible for certain people deciding, perhaps from vindictiveness, perhaps from sheer stupidity, to report my posts because they can't follow a sentence.

Swipe left for the next trending thread