A corpus-assisted discourse analysis of linguistic transphobia on Mumsnet

[IwantToRetire]

By Aston Institute for Forensic Linguistics

It has been suggested that the forum-style parenting website Mumsnet is a hub for ‘gender-critical’ feminism, which directly opposes transgender rights, to be practised with little moderation (Livingston, 2018). This presentation reports on the initial stages of a project aiming to investigate that the potential intensification of linguistic transphobia on Mumsnet may lead to further marginalisation of transgender people offline (Powys Maurice, 2021). Though studies of non-linguistic transphobic rhetoric on Mumsnet (e.g., Pedersen, 2022; Mackenzie, 2019), and discourse analyses of other radical online communities (e.g., Krendel, 2020) have both occurred, this project is the first to analyse linguistic transphobia on Mumsnet. It also contributes to existing literature surrounding UK-based ‘gender-critical’ feminism; linguistic transphobia; and radical online community discourses.

The presentation explores the rise of potentially ‘gender-critical’ linguistic transphobia on Mumsnet over time through the corpus linguistic (CL) analysis of the ‘Feminism: Sex & Gender Discussions’ board, using three corpora comprising a fifteen-year timeframe: 2008-2013; 2013-2018; and 2018-2023. As the project is still ongoing, preliminary findings will be presented, namely a comparative overview of trends yielded in frequency analyses. Overall, this presentation provides insights into the growing commonality of potentially ‘gender-critical’ feminist rhetoric on Mumsnet and its effect on increasing transphobic discourse on the site.

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/a-corpus-assisted-discourse-analysis-of-linguistic-transphobia-on-mumsnet-tickets-880795271367?aff=ebdssbdestsearch

(I had just finished my favourite tea time treat of catching up on FWR and was going to get back to the grindstone when this popped up on my feed. So have come back as it is too good not to be shared. Enjoy!)

And are single posts or threads deleted by MNHQ on request left in a form that can still be scraped, even though they are not visible to the public forum?

Very important question.

The 'discourse' has shifted to a post-Cass world in the UK.
We know that all that the academic arm of the pro trans 'no debate' lobby has left now is to create an echo chamber of bad research which quotes other weak and unevidenced papers and building what looks like research but is just a biased Gender Critical phobic smear attack.
They'll use this 'evidence' to approach mumsnet advertisers and try and convince them to withdraw sponsorship, hopefully advertisers will have wised up to this tactic a bit by now.

@IwantToRetire , I agree too. I'm concerned about the student as well. She's young and doing a PhD is stressful enough without all this. You are absolutely right that her supervisor(s), and higher management, should be held accountable. Also, surely two supervisors would be appointed, not just the one named so far. I thought two was the norm. I hope she's getting appropriate support.

Her supervisor, Nicci Macleod's, twiX banner alteration seemed like a really juvenile response and does not sit at all well alongside being able to supervise impartially a project like Eden's.

It doesn't sit well alongside this Linkedin post from last year either where Nicci is advertising for a research assistant to 'support me at the Aston Institute for Forensic Linguistics on my BA/Leverhulme project examining the language of police interviews with rape victims'. (I think Nicci's own PhD was on this subject.) Her trans banner reaction makes me immediately question how objective she is able to be in other settings like the rape related work? https://www.linkedin.com/posts/niccimacleod_job-vacancy-at-aston-university-research-activity-6993523046707789824-0gkj?trk=public_profile_like_view This sort of project may be important, robustly conducted and ethically sound, but right now, given what's been talked about on this thread, I'm immediately questioning what datasets were being used? Did the victims [sic] consent to their information being used? Did their cases ever go to court? Could they ever be identified by anyone including rapists? Is this now yet another thing that survivors need to be aware of before they report to the police?

project examining the language of police interviews with rape victims

This has to be some sick joke.

Its now well accepted that the growth and influence of queer politics back in the 80s & 90s not only pushed out women's studies but led to many who graduated from this indoctrination into positions of power and influence. eg journalism where you can get the NUJ to stop using the word sex and instead use the word gender. Or become party hacks and start lobbying MPs on trans identity.

But what I and maybe others, hadn't really taken into account is that the embedding of queer politics in universities is now so much a foundation stone of these institutions, that they are as it were the canary in the changing face of the life around us.

So we are getting maybe just a glimpse of just how far down the rainbow path they have all gone. A student who heads her research as though it is accepted by the world that how those of us who post on FWR are transphobes. For them there is no discussion. For them this is the world.

Slightly off topic but related is how if there is a group think in an area of work or service provision on any issue, that can leak into the world of those who use that work or provision.

Only recently I have noticed this on google. For years I have had newsfeeds set up of issues that interest me and relate to the volunteer work I do.

They aren't very sophisticated ie on single words one of which is "women". So for years via google I have news stories about women, whether in relation to being a victim of crime, winning a prize, writing a book or whatever.

But in the past few weeks, the news feed "women" now regularly includes links to fetish clothing associated with porn, and (shudder) firms providing "useful" undersear for trans women.

So I know there are other search engines, but google is still one of the largest, and if the change in a news feed I have had set up for years is now producing these type of results, what does that imply about how those who tweak these search results or worse have educated AI to produce the search results are thinking.

I have found this really disturbing and although sent complaints to google doubt anyone will notice or bother.

But the implications that yourger people who have no other bench makr, will now have the results for the word women filtered through the lens of pornified incel trans is truely frightening.

Yes I’m wondering how that information was obtained

Surely to goodness consent would have been obtained from the rape victims?

I had assumed that would be the case, tbh, and that work was part of the reason I defended AU as doing potentially useful work.

But if course even well intentioned work has the potential to do harm if its not done ethically and with careful consideration. Is there info in the paper on the methodology?

Here is her PhD thesis. See 3.2.4 Ethical Considerations. She says the police forces involved are responsible for gaining informed consent from the women involved, and doesn't deal with that aspect after that. No contact details were released to her.

Apologies I can't copy and paste from the pdf but it's on pages 59 and 60.

publications.aston.ac.uk/id/eprint/15206/1/NJMacLeodPhD.pdf

Yes you can read her full methodology in the pdf I linked.

I read the methodology section. Data was 'obtained from police'. There is no mention at all of consent, the word is not used at all. Unless I've missed it, paper is below.

It is possible that at the time of interview women were asked if they'd be happy to have the contents of their interviews used.for future research, I suppose. I hope that was the case.

This paper dates from 2010.

I note some data was discarded as the victims were children and therefore considered vulnerable, and I find it a bit surprising that the understanding that any woman reporting a rape is vulnerable was not made.

I also found it odd that the page of acknowledgements and dedications doesn't mention the rape victims.

For anyone reading, obvious content warning.

https://publications.aston.ac.uk/id/eprint/15206/

Oh, cross post Eresh.

The word consent is used in 3.2.4, I think we cross posted maybe? She talks (briefly) about the "principle of informed consent" then says it's up to the police to get that.

And again

yes this is an extract from a book chapter in 2020 on police interviews with rape victims
(Cannot link as has my library in the link but it is a chapter in a book published by OUP)

This research was approved by Aston's School of Languages and Social Sciences Ethics Committee.

Right, thanks, so there is a section on consent, my apologies.

The police obtained 'informed consent'

However it's still not very clear to me what 'informed consent' means here.

I absolutely would not want this woman trawling through my interview with the police for linguistic tics after being raped, whatever the greater good to society, so I hope these police forces were scrupulous in obtaining informed consent.

I'm not sure she definitely knows that the police got consent, unless you've read that confirmed. I've only skimmed.

Thanks.

I'm glad there is a section on consent and that it's been given consideration.

I'm not completely comfortable with this data being made available so freely tbh. But hopefully the police handle the subject of how data will be used and consent with sensitivity and care.

Same. This woman or apparently any researcher for any purpose?

Anonymity is not the fucking point, here.

It’s funny how the supervisor in her own PhD knows all about concepts like respect, beneficence and informed consent but then when it comes to her student’s work on Mumsnet there is a complete lack of respect, no informed consent at all and as far as it looks from where I’m standing, mal- rather than beneficence.

I wish I could c&p because as a rape survivor myself I find the "Ethical Considerations" paragraph I mentioned rather short and glib to be frank.
.

I don’t think she has got consent from the part I extracted.
Section 33 of the 1998 Data Protection Act is about using data if it does not impact on decisions about individuals and 33A is also certain exemptions. It links back to various other paragraphs so I don’t have time at the moment to work out what exactly this means. But the police recorded the interviews and she has used them. [Edited to add - as posters have noted above, the PHD says that the police were responsible for gaining consent. Not clear if that means consent to interview for the purposes of reporting and potential prosecution or consent for the research. I hope the latter].

https://www.harrow.gov.uk/downloads/file/24411/data-protection-act.pdf

I've had a look at the College of Policing guidelines for forensic interviews and see nothing about consent for future research, but perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place.

What a thread!
All the reasons in the world for women to fear reporting rape to the police and now there's another one. That a video of you can be handed over to randoms identifying as "researchers" to pore over your distress looking for .... presumably anything ??

Is it really beneficial to root through her previous research? I assume if it's been approved by the university ethics committee due diligence has been followed.