Deleted/censorship on mumsnet now!

[HermioneKipper]

My thread asking about transwomen/transitioning/penises has been deleted.

Why are we not allowed to discuss this? It’s a genuine question and extremely relevant to the debate about transwomen entering female spaces.

There was no abuse of trans people that I could see aside from a few people attempting to derail by saying that they couldn’t see why women might be concerned about having to share their space!

This isn’t right

around 85% of transwomen retain their penis

Let's assume trans people are 50/50 male and female, so that would mean there are around 300,000 transwomen. If 15% have had gender reassignment surgery, that would be 45,000. From 2000 to 2010 "a total of 853 trans women and 12 trans men had state-funded surgery to change sex". There will be some who instead had their treatment abroad but even if you assume the same amount, you're looking at maybe 2,000 surgeries per decade (looking back).

45,000 is probably around an order of magnitude too high. The number retaining their penis is going to be more like 95%+.

I actually found that thread interesting to read - I didn’t post on it but found it interesting.

@nauticant

around 85% of transwomen retain their penis

Let's assume trans people are 50/50 male and female, so that would mean there are around 300,000 transwomen. If 15% have had gender reassignment surgery, that would be 45,000. From 2000 to 2010 "a total of 853 trans women and 12 trans men had state-funded surgery to change sex". There will be some who instead had their treatment abroad but even if you assume the same amount, you're looking at maybe 2,000 surgeries per decade (looking back).

45,000 is probably around an order of magnitude too high. The number retaining their penis is going to be more like 95%+.

This.

IIRC the GERES wording is less that % don't have surgery but that % do not have any wish to have surgery which is why I have always understood that it's not an issue of the availability of the surgery.

I’m registering my support for the OP and that this topic is a reasonable one to discuss. I followed it, and learnt (through then going off to read further) some very important points on a topic that I cannot find out elsewhere.

I also would like to know about advertising revenue being related to certain topics being zapped. Freedom of speech is important, just zap the posts breaking the guidelines.

@HermioneKipper

It’s not hate speech to ask questions and I’m not transphobic for being concerned about the future of women’s safety and the sanctity of women’s sport

Never see the same posters start threads about the disparity of pay between men and women in sports, the lack of funding for womens sports overall, the lack of media interaction with womens sports, weird that

Hello all - sorry, it looks like I could be clearer in explaining things and I don't want to be the cause of any confusion. In our view the thread was had many sweeping generalisations that do not sit well with our guidelines.

[Quoted posts removed by MNHQ]

There were way too many of these type of posts on the thread to warrant keeping it. (Nb we are going to edit this message shortly to remove these posts - it’s too easy for them to be screengrabbed and used against us.) But we want to be clear we will continue to delete generalisations like this and those who keep posting them will be in danger of a ban, while still of course being committed to allowing this important conversation to continue on Mumsnet. Thank you.

Still Spartacus.

Freedom of speech is important

Mumsnet is a business

Freedom of speech (something that doesnt exist in British law) means nothing more than the government cant censure you nothing to do with private business and its advertisers

Oh and transphobia shouldnt be included in the mythical British free speech either

Yes, I, too, am still Spartacus.

For those who are new to this discussion or this board, I would recommend reading right back through the archive here. There is a lot of really important information.

I am going to report every person from now on that calls valid concern for women’s rights and protections in law and in society -phobia.

It. Is. Not.

Aaaaahhhhh I get it thank you Becky, feel a bit thick now tbh.

@JustAnotherPoster00 I had no idea that this was a prerequisite for posting about gender ideology. Wow. A learning day for meeker.

I don't think the thread was in any way offensive, upsetting etc. It was informative, respectful and balanced.

So much for free speech! It seems that only some have the privilege of free speech whilst the rest of us are silenced, this is not helping mothers, women or girls is it.... I am really sad about the thread being deleted.

@Ninkanink

I am going to report every person from now on that calls valid concern for women’s rights and protections in law and in society -phobia.

It. Is. Not.

Yup. It should be a 2 way thing for sure.

Mumsnet - ironically not a safe space for women!

So “sweeping generalisations” means “posting hard truths that reporters don’t like people knowing about”. Ok. Got it a bit more .

Still Spartacus.

#No thank you.

But those aren't generalisations @YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet they are the truth! How is a truth a 'generalisation'? Why can the truth not be posted? And, even if they were purely generalisations, how is a generalisation breaking some guidelines (which is a 'guide' anyway, so if you mean rules, write rules or TOS, 'guidelines' are by definition not compulsory as they are purely a guide)? Nothing in those 'generalisations' breaks any guidelines, let alone TOS. They are harmless and general discussion.

Freedom of speech (something that doesnt exist in British law)

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/9

You're not even trying. Just randomly posting untrue stuff to cause doubt.

Whether one agrees with MN moderation policies or not, I must say I appreciate YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet/MNHQ taking the time to explain their reasons.

It should also be a 3 strikes and you’re out.

I am utterly SICK of it.

Do you know what really warms my heart though? They’ll never stop me (us) talking - if they succeed in shutting down our voices here, we’ll just keep talking elsewhere. They don’t frighten me.

If feminism has to go underground, so be it.

@NotBadConsidering

So “sweeping generalisations” means “posting hard truths that reporters don’t like people knowing about”. Ok. Got it a bit more .

Yes, nothing too straight to the heart of it and no passion or frustration

Thanks for clarifying, Becky.

I'd add my own frustration to the posters saying they have had posts deleted or been given a strike but they don't know why.

I've been in the same situation and either didn't get an email saying what I'd done wrong or it was something vague which lacked information I could use to ensure I stay in the guidelines.

I'm not a GF. I don't want to make trouble for MN because I really value this space.

However, it is very difficult to stick to undefined guidelines. I'm exasperated that unofficial moderators' can shut down women's discussion about issues which impact our lives.

I am glad that we have somewhere to discuss it, though and I'm glad that so many women benefit from the thoughtful posts on here. Some of those women are journalists and politicians and women with power - so, take heart, OP, it's never in vain.

@NotBadConsidering

So “sweeping generalisations” means “posting hard truths that reporters don’t like people knowing about”. Ok. Got it a bit more .

This. The TRUTH is not any kind of generalisation. What the mod means, is that anything that is TRUTH they call a 'generalisation'.

@Chickenyhead

Well that's gutting.

I felt it presented both arguments for and against.

Because people who aren't trans are not qualified to present arguments for an against it being OK for trans women to have penises.

I mean WTAF.

I'm glad it's been deleted.