Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

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

771 replies

RaveOnThisCrazyFeeling · 30/12/2019 17:31

@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"?

OP posts:
Ereshkigal · 09/01/2020 13:03

There's a big difference between legitimate concerns and deliberately being abusive and offensive for the sake of it...

Is pointing out that biologically male people are male in order to discuss these legitimate concerns "deliberately being abusive and offensive for the sake of it", snow? Just so we're clear.

NotBadConsidering · 09/01/2020 13:03

Yes, despite clear evidence that posts are removed despite not being abusive, there is the continuation of the theme that the rules are needed because of abuse. It’s a recognised tactic to try and make a lie stick by repeating it over and over.

GirlDownUnder · 09/01/2020 13:05

Do you have an opinion or thought or argument beyond calling other posters (who you can’t possibly know) racists / bigots / abusive blah blah

That’s a no then.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 09/01/2020 13:05

I think what I'd most like to point out to Justine and the rest of the management team is that the tide is already turning, and the advertisers will come around eventually. There's a massive amount of inertia to overcome but the thing is, we were right all along, and the more information that hits the media the more people that becomes clear to. If you look at where we are now compared to where we were a couple of years ago in terms of public debate, there's been a definite shift, and that shift is moving in a pro the general FWR position direction.

The fall of Jo Swinson was illuminating. There is very little real public support for self ID, and while the numbers firmly in the GC camps are still relatively small the percentage of the public in the "tired of all this gender stuff and just wants it to go away" camp is massive. The advertisers have misread public opinion, and they'll eventually figure that out.

WotchaTalkinBoutWillis · 09/01/2020 13:06

It's not a lie though.

WotchaTalkinBoutWillis · 09/01/2020 13:06

That was in response to notbad, fast moving thread

NotBadConsidering · 09/01/2020 13:07

Out of interest, I will donate 500 dollars to the Australian bushfire relief charity if anyone can read my post linked above by OldCrone and tell me which single word I changed to make the post acceptable. For clarity, the original post starts at the second paragraph and finishes at the penultimate paragraph.

Ereshkigal · 09/01/2020 13:08

The fall of Jo Swinson was illuminating.

As was how the woke BBC repeatedly threw her to the lions over this issue. They know no one buys it.

PracticallyFamous · 09/01/2020 13:08

We're not arguing for the right to call transpeople, individually or collectively, nasty smelly donkeys FFS. We're arguing for the right to talk about reality. To point out that the people driving this movement which is having a real detrimental affect on women and their rights, their safety, their dignity, are men. To name them as men, because they are. To not be compelled into denying the evidence of our own eyes and the biological reality of not being able to change sex. To have the freedom to highlight the risks to safeguarding of children and who is behind those risks. To discuss the reality of the so-called sex reassignment surgery and the life-limiting complications it can cause.

None of that is abusive. And believe me, if you are on the side of those who would suppress open and honest conversation about the harms being done to a generation of children in the name of being progressive, you really need to take a long hard look at yourself.

GirlDownUnder · 09/01/2020 13:09

I hope you’re as dedicated in your witch infraction hunt on Piston Heads and Kiwi Farms. Or are those not the sites you stalk in order to ‘notice’ similar posting names??

Datun · 09/01/2020 13:10

The fall of Jo Swinson was illuminating.

Indeed. And the sunlight is coming thick and fast now.

That one question, what is a woman, alone, is hugely influential.

When the general public realise that MPs can't even define the word woman, much less advocate for their rights, it's all over.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 09/01/2020 13:10

I don't even know what Piston Heads is. Something to do with cars I assume?

LangCleg · 09/01/2020 13:11

Here is a post I recently wrote about a laughable strike given to Floral.

If I'm understanding this correctly, Floral has been given a strike for a sentence in a post that made a "negative generalisation". The rules say no "negative generalisations" can be made about either trans people or GC feminists.

The subject of this sentence was the monitors. This is a term used hereabouts for a small group of extreme Woke activists (some of whom are trans, some of whom are not trans) who keep up a constant monitoring of FWR for perceived wrongthink. They organise to report such instances to the mod team. We know this to be true because not only do they boast about it on Twitter, they also write blogs about it.

I am, therefore, at a loss as to why a strike has been issued. I can only think of two possible scenarios:

A: one or more members of the mod team are unable to identify the subject of a sentence written in English.

B: the monitors now form a third group about whom negative generalisations are strikeable offences on FWR but the rules have not been updated to reflect this.

Oh, there's a third!

C: we're in the Upside Down.

MNHQ - what on earth is going on?! This is a thread about the safeguarding of children on a parenting website! Sort it out!

It then transpired that the mods had no idea to whom "the monitors" referred and had fucked up. So I said:

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.

Justine - this isn't an isolated incident. It's happening on this board every single bloody day. Why else do you think threads like this one show up over and over again? And why else do you think you get such a poor response when you show up and act as though the same ground hasn't been repeatedly trodden? At some point, surely, you're going to have accept there is an actual issue here. You don't honestly see us as a load of feral bigots whose views about child protection and women's rights are beyond the pale, do you?

Or do you?

GirlDownUnder · 09/01/2020 13:11

Sorry - my last message was to Snow, but suppose there could be others it applies to on this thread now.

Ereshkigal · 09/01/2020 13:12

I don't even know what Piston Heads is. Something to do with cars I assume?

Yes I think it's a mostly male car forum. They have "invaded" MN before and vice versa if I remember correctly.

NotBadConsidering · 09/01/2020 13:13

It's not a lie though

It’s a truth that only posts that are abusive are removed? How do you explain my post being removed on the surgery thread then?

Maybe only the posts you report are the ones you consider to be abusive, but that doesn’t mean the same thing. And my point is the mods are under so much pressure that they will err of the side of money caution, so a confirmed deletion doesn’t mean it was justifiable.

wrongsideofhistorymyarse · 09/01/2020 13:14

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.

What's your definition of transphobia? And where are the transphobic posts?

JanesKettle · 09/01/2020 13:14

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 09/01/2020 13:14

Not sure why I'd want to invade a car forum buy hey, I suppose everyone needs a hobby. Though I wish there weren't so many people who'd chosen "control the words women use to a degree that comes across as downright obsessive" as theirs.

Ereshkigal · 09/01/2020 13:15

I might be remembering that wrong.

snowblight · 09/01/2020 13:16

We're not arguing for the right to call transpeople, individually or collectively, nasty smelly donkeys FFS. We're arguing for the right to talk about reality.

But you just can't help yourselves veering towards the former frequently on this site. The cherry-picking of negative stories, the ridiculing of trans people who have nothing to do with this debate, it just goes on and on.

Ereshkigal · 09/01/2020 13:16

Though I wish there weren't so many people who'd chosen "control the words women use to a degree that comes across as downright obsessive" as theirs.

Indeed.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 09/01/2020 13:17

I mean, is stamp collecting not a thing any more? Toy trains? Surely there must be something that doesn't hinge on following women around shouting at them about how they haven't worded their sentence precisely as you'd like.

Ereshkigal · 09/01/2020 13:17

Any chance you could answer my polite question, snow?

Is pointing out that biologically male people are male in order to discuss these legitimate concerns "deliberately being abusive and offensive for the sake of it"?

Datun · 09/01/2020 13:18

But you just can't help yourselves veering towards the former frequently on this site. The cherry-picking of negative stories,

How can you cherry pick negative stories!

Such dingbattery.

It's the very negativity of those stories that demonstrate the mechanisms we're advocating against.

Strewth.

Swipe left for the next trending thread