"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"?

if a trans person appears prominently in the media

they generally (but not always) behave like authoritarian shits towards women, telling us what we can and cannot do, what we can and cannot call ourselves, what spaces we can and cannot have to ourselves.

It's hardly surprising that this kind of very common behaviour (yes, hello Bergdorf, 'women, do not talk about reproductive health issues at the women's march') is criticised by women.

Justine, did you just admit that users have a right to be angry with the way Mumsnet has been handling this issue? If so I'm very pleased but even more frustrated that you're not taking the leap from that to actually adjusting the guidelines to be less infuriating.

Oh, let the idiot monitors (and, for the avoidance of banhammer, I mean those that externally watch the site) have their pyrrhic victory on Mumsnet, and enjoy whatever weird thrill it gives them.
Cat's out of the bag anyway. The Detransitioners are gathering strength, LGB Alliance is up and running, and they don't have the stranglehold on the media they used to. Let 'em gadfly if they must. Obsolescence awaits in the fulness of time.

Do you just cut and paste the same response over and over again
Sorry, not an actual clue what are you talking about?!
I agreed with a poster and quoted the bit I was referring to.
Don't know if you're getting me confused with someone else

number of abusive individuals on the so-called feminist boards

Oi, cut it out.

Transwidows, parents of kids with late onset gendery dysphoria, lesbians who understand their orientation as same sex attracted and want to keep it that way - we get support here. One of the few places we do. That's as far from 'abusive' as it's possible to get.

Justine, did you just admit that users have a right to be angry with the way Mumsnet has been handling this issue? If so I'm very pleased but even more frustrated that you're not taking the leap from that to actually adjusting the guidelines to be less infuriating.

Angry doesn't mean someone is right. I'm sure quite a few racists are equally as angry as transphobes about their supposed right to free speech (abuse) being curtailed.

Also, anyone not wishing to engage on a particular issue can simply not engage. You're never going to get a situation where everyone agrees on every issue, not with as many people as there are on this site, but generally if one doesn't want to discuss a particular topic one skips it rather than insisting that other people stop discussing it. I mostly stayed out of the Brexit threads because I found them frustrating and didn't feel that jumping in would in any way improve the situation.

Well, there you have it......this is going to have to be an underground movement.....utilising 'permitted' public spaces only for the purposes of coded exchange of information and links. A bit like the 'underground railroad' or the 'war time resistance' - the guardians and the spies are everywhere.I've never been one for the mainstream, anyway.

Snowblight
Good point

Angry doesn't mean someone is right. I'm sure quite a few racists are equally as angry as transphobes about their supposed right to free speech (abuse) being curtailed

I genuinely don't believe that you understand what actual racism or sexism looks like. It is not just about 'trigger words' you know.

Really enjoying the repeated attempts by a certain poster to link FWR with racism and abuse. Must be quite the exciting thing to be so emboldened by this decision. Bravo, bravo.

I'm sure quite a few racists are equally as angry as transphobes

Again, cut it out.

Mumsnet, is slurring feminists for the hell of it 'in the spirit' ?

I agree but not all our users feel the same way about this issue and some frankly simply don't want to engage with it and are rather put off.

Do you have numbers on this? Have you surveyed users? I’m just struggling here. Surely the advertisers’ job is to look at their target market - MN users - find out what they’re interested in and how they position themselves, and advertise accordingly. So the only way advertisers would be nervous about being associated with MN is if the majority of users perceive transphobia (not the Twitter Outraged), and that has been surveyed, collated and presented to the advertisers. Is that the case? Whenever there’s a thread in AIBU it certainly doesn’t seem that way.

If advertisers aren’t interested in what users here actually think and will only advertise to users here if it’s demonstrated everyone thinks in an acceptable manner, aren’t they really shit advertisers?

Janes, I think the mod contributions on thread have made that pretty bloody clear really.

If advertisers aren’t interested in what users here actually think and will only advertise to users here if it’s demonstrated everyone thinks in an acceptable manner, aren’t they really shit advertisers?

I mean, "you can only buy our product if you agree with us" is certainly some sort of business plan. Not a very good one, but hey ho.

I genuinely don't believe that you understand what actual racism or sexism looks like. It is not just about 'trigger words' you know.

I understand very well what actual racism feels like thank you very much.

Also, anyone not wishing to engage on a particular issue can simply not engage

Ah, but you see Kittens, you don't have the heart of an authoritarian. You actually allow others to discuss without seeking to silence them.

I don't think you understand what it's like to be deeply invested in shutting women up. It's a tough job, but someone has to seek to control all disagreement anywhere women gather.

Floral silly me, I forgot slurring feminists is every TRA's noble duty, approved by advertisers all over the UK!

If you’re the ad company responsible for Castrol Motor Oil, do you advertise on mechanics’ forums, or do you only advertise on mechanics’ forums if those in charge of the site promise to clean up the language and moderate unsavoury opinions because apparently Twitter says everyone on the mechanics’ forum is a bigot?

Mumsnet, is slurring feminists for the hell of it 'in the spirit' ?

It's not for the hell of it. It's making a valid comparison. There is a significant element on this forum who merely want to change the rules so they can have a free-for-all in terms of ridiculing and demonising trans people. Anyone who denies that that is a motivation for some members is a liar.

There is a significant element on this forum who merely want to change the rules so they can have a free-for-all in terms of ridiculing and demonising trans people

And you know this how ?

Unevidenced assertions do nothing for me, sorry.

Yet again, I will rely on my experience of the feminists on this board, who have helped me make the wisest and best decisions for my trans kids I could have made.

snowblight you mean racists like those who say black women and only women in the same way men are women?

What about actions of trans people? If a trans person does something ridiculous, like...ooh let’s say talk their way into a woman’s prison, are they are not allowed to be ridiculed for that just because they trans? If a person who just happens to be trans does something ridiculous like claim there is more than two sexes, can they be ridiculed for that? There’s just so much ambiguity in that word isn’t there? It’s almost as if people would like all the actions of trans people to be off limits just because they’re trans rather than have the action itself be the focus. I think we need clearer guidelines from you snowblight to tell us what we can and can’t ridicule.

There is a significant element on this forum who merely want to change the rules so they can have a free-for-all in terms of ridiculing and demonising trans people. Anyone who denies that that is a motivation for some members is a liar.

You do like your name calling. I'm honestly not that bothered what you want to call me, the labels don't scare me.

Your point appears to be that it's a good thing to prevent women being allowed to name themselves, to correctly sex people to avoid compelled speech and compelled behaviour, to prevent female homosexuals discussing their identity and freedoms and the assaults on their freedoms, to prevent awareness raising, discussion and work to protect child safeguarding, and in fact to defend the rights of female people and children..... because it might stop a few who just want to ridicule and demonise trans people.

Seriously? Could your bias be any more evident there?