"Mumsnet statement on moderation with regard to..."

[RaveOnThisCrazyFeeling]

@MNHQ, I am wondering if the statement sticky at the top of this section needs a new, more accurate, less misleading title.

A large part of the difficulty that women encounter in discussing these issues comes from the framing of the issue as being about 'trans rights'. This implies that feminists are arguing against the equal rights of trans people, which of course isn't the case at all. It also disregards the fact that women and their rights have any stake in the issues being discussed - it makes it all about trans people having rights, or not having rights, and to the casual, uninformed observer that reinforces the TRA narrative that women are a privileged class denying the rights of oppressed transwomen.

In fact, women are the historically and systemically disadvantaged sex class, and so ha e a very large stake in legal and social understanding of sex and gender.

Might you give some consideration to changing the thread name (and OP as appropriate) to "...discussion of sex and gender" rather than "discussion of trans rights"?

So, any random trans person apparently deserves more protection from personal commentary than the future monarch, who is currently 6 years old.

Ahhh, the spirit of MN...

I don't want to drag this particular issue out...but would it be possible for someone to post me a link to the twitter thread on which, I imagine, butchered and manipulated fragments of my now deleted thread starter appeared? ( on gender performance/'studied' performance)

I'm not familiar with how twitter works and wouldn't know where to begin. I don't even use a mobile phone........so am not really 'up' with this stuff.

It was a post with your words from on here, so not sure how it'd have been manipulated - it's what you wrote.

If people had discussed the issues rationally, without frequently resorting to generalisations, abuse and ridicule of trans people, the mods probably wouldn't have needed to introduce the guidelines.

Silly irrational women. You brought it on yourself.

Great post molesmokes

Mumsnet, please, listen.

*It was a post with your words from on here, so not sure how it'd have been manipulated - it's what you wrote8

Could you post a link, please..so I can judge for myself. You didn't even see the original thread, according to yourself.

If people had discussed the issues rationally

That is usually my favoured style. It is you that is using emotive language. You didn't even contribute to the thread.

Nah.

If men hadn't pretended that biological sex wasnt real then these guidelines wouldnt be here.

Darvo.

Is there anyone else who could post me a link? Seems I'm not going to get any co-operation from those most invested.

Why would I post a link?!
MN have deleted your post, twice.
Don't particularly fancy a deletion myself ta, do you think I'm daft?!
No, actually don't answer that lol

Why would I post a link?

I'm talking about a link to the twitter thread, you idiot. You can't link to content that has been deleted on mumsnet for goodness sake.

Justa, sorry, I can't post a link, largely because I don't hang about in the circles on Twitter that harvest screenshots from here like weird stalker people so I don't know where it is.

But as distressing as it is to be being accused of something and denied the evidence to be able to defend yourself, can I gently suggest that you are being goaded by the kind of people who do hang out in those circles and support the coercive guidelines imposed on us here, so they don't have the same perspective on fairness that you do. That sort of thing is best ignored.

That sort of thing is best ignored

Yes, I agree. Thanks! Sorry for derailing further.

The Twitter link has your post on it, the one that's been deleted. Why would you think a link to your comment that's been deleted, twice, would be a good idea?
No need for the insults, only thing idiotic is thinking that reposting the content via a link on a forum that's already removed it would be a good idea.

Yes, I agree. Thanks! Sorry for derailing further.

No problem. Have a better day and do something positive to take your mind off it.

How's that meeting coming along, @MNHQ? Any progress?

I don't hang around in any "circles", I literally got curious as to what was said due to this thread so went for a nosey!
Before anyone starts with "how did I know where to look" just searched a few names that people always mention on here and got lucky

Genuinely don't care. Thread is moving on.

There have been many threads removed in the past about individuals in the public eye, not just trans people. It doesn't take much for them to get filled up with slander, accusations and bullshit tbh - they are one of my least favourite things about mumsnet. I'd imagine posting speculation about named people can cause legal issues.

That's why I despair when good threads about court cases or someone in the news (for example) get filled up with gossipy crap.

There was one where people were arguing, on this board, about how feminine a woman's appearance was. Only one or two people, but that's all the irrelevance it took for the whole thread to go puff.

Just because some of us disagree with you on some things or support trans people doesn’t mean we’re ‘TRAs’ or that we don’t support women.

I’m certainly not posting a link as it was a banned topic and we don’t need to give publicity to certain other areas. I might have PM’d it to you if you’d asked politely but I probably won’t bother now.

I'm sure that'll teach whoever you're cross with a good lesson Field

Returning to the OP: I agree I find the word 'rights' in that mod statement not very accurate or unbiased.

There are no legal or human rights that trans people don't have equal to others. Being recognised as part of a class group with access to all resources reserved for that class group when you objectively don't belong to that class - whether that's race, age, ability or sex - is not a right, and I don't believe should be a right.

Women's rights under law are rights, and should not be removed. The discussions here are about the danger to, attacks on and attempts to remove women's rights, and children's rights. I don't expect MN to abandon the moderation position they've been forced into, but a more accurate and less biased position would be helpful.

Justhadathought I won't post a link to the tweet because it has your deleted post in it and as someone else said, that might get my post deleted. You don't have to scroll down far to find it though. It was indeed posted by one of the usual suspects.

twitter.com/joss_prior

I went to have a nosy as I missed Just's thread(s) and I'm blocked, despite never having interacted with that person so far as I know. I assume they're using some kind of "you follow X therefore you're a naughty person" algorithm.

If you log out of twitter you should be able to see it. You don't need to be logged in to see it - I'm not on twitter.

Justhadathought I won't post a link to the tweet because it has your deleted post in it

Thanks!