Thread 3: A corpus-assisted discourse analysis of linguistic transphobia on Mumsnet

[VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia]

In which we continue to discuss the Aston scrapists.

• The Site Stuff thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/sitestuff/5057903-mumsnet-corpus
• FWR thread #1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5057460-a-corpus-assisted-discourse-analysis-of-linguistic-transphobia-on-mumsnet
• FWR thread #2: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5060410-thread-2-a-corpus-assisted-discourse-analysis-of-linguistic-transphobia-on-mumsnet

It was meant to be a light hearted remark.

In response to " ... We used it at Mumsnet to build MumsGPT, which uncovers and summarises what parents are thinking about – everything from beauty trends to supermarkets to politicians – and we licensed OpenAI’s API (application programming interface) to build it. ... "

So if there is a MumsGPT why not a FWRGPT?!

It is probably under construction.

I misread this as fully fledged PhD.

I was going to comment that this must mean that all the details are now in the public domain.

So the news is she's officially been able to start her research?

I would love to ask the uni /Eden how they feel that titled could be defended in the light of this publication by Jo Phoenix/ University of Reading (but can't see a way to comment, story doesn't seem to be on X):

https://sex-matters.org/posts/other-resources/dont-get-caught-out-a-summary-of-gender-critical-belief-discrimination-employment-tribunal-judgments/

With particular reference to section 6.3 "calling people who hold gender critical beliefs TERF or transphobic can be derogatory name calling".

As someone wisely commented on another recent thread, you can be anti an ideology without being anti the people who believe it.

I can't believe she's being encouraged to study such a flawed premise.

Sterling work by Sex Matters as always. Just skimming through the pdf, one extract caught my eye, that I think is worth highlighting. Talking about the Forstater EAT, under the section The Need To Tolerate Opposing Viewpoints 😛:

“Just as the legal recognition of Civil Partnerships does not negate the right of a person to believe that marriage should only apply to heterosexual couples, becoming the acquired gender “for all purposes” within the meaning of GRA does not negate a person’s right to believe, like the Claimant, that as a matter of biology a trans person is still their natal sex. Both beliefs may well be profoundly offensive and even distressing to many others, but they are beliefs that are and must be tolerated in a pluralist society.”

Some of MN's fly-by scolders might well reflect on that

YouGov today are asking about under which circumstances AI companies should be allowed to scrape data from publishers and artists. Nothing about whether universities should be allowed to though.

Eden’s work looks at the nature and development of transphobic language online, using corpus assisted critical discourse analysis to unpick implicitly discriminatory discourse.

It feels like that some at AIFL are determined to view FWR as transphobic. Whether that’s poor comprehension skills, confirmation bias or self-referential over-interpretations of posters comments or a combination of all three, it’s frustrating. Frustrating to see poor scholarship but frustrating when the drive by scolders don’t engage with key arguments but just repeat the same specious or off topic comment over and over again. Never engage on the wider implications of their argument that TWAW. Yet happy to taint, and thus attempt to belittle or undermine, the legitimate concerns for women and girls expressed on FWR.

I really don't think "they're all horrid and mean" should form any part of the basis for an academic exercise, but I have yet to hear anything about EP's thesis that doesn't start from that point.

Very horrid and mean of you to say that, Squeaks.

Imagine doing a doctorate basically saying 'those people are meany bums'. That's about as rigorous as Aston require from the sound of things so far.

@DrTWETMIRF what does TWETMIRF stand for? All the things I can come up with are surreal, revolting or both.

‘So what you are REALLY saying is’

ODFOD. We say exactly what we mean, Mx Palmer!

Transwoman excluding, transman including rad fem. A more accurate reflection of my views than TERF

DAFUQ!?

Well…. I haven’t checked the Site Stuff thread for a while but are MNHQ ok with apparently letting transphobia stand on their site or are we to assume Nicci and Eden are talking about Netmums?

https://research.aston.ac.uk/en/persons/nicci-macleod

PhD Supervision
Current:

Karolina Placzynta: Hate speech in moderated social media contexts: patterns, parallels, and intersections

Eden Palmer. A corpus-assisted discourse analysis of linguistic transphobia on a British parenting forum, 2010-2023.

Jenna Elliott. A corpus assisted critical discourse analysis of the manifestos of mass shooters in the U.S.A.

Julija Danu. Stability of authorship markers across discourse types and links to personality traits.

Looking back on this thread @JustineMumsnet said

“Consequently we have asked Aston University to immediately cease and desist all scraping activities, to immediately destroy both datasets and to provide a written assurance that they will refrain from any further unauthorised access or use of our content.”

if the datasets were to be destroyed how has Eden still managed “…analysis of linguistic transphobia on a British parenting forum, 2010-2023.”?

Genuine question as I’ve no idea if deleting the datasets could have happened after the analysis was completed.

I like it!

I don’t remember exactly but I think the PhD was the second more recent dataset and Aston did not agree to delete it.

AstonVillans kindly linked to Justine's announcement about that in the quoted post. Aston deleted the sandbox but not the PhD data.

@MaggieCalvert I'm interested in whether your views have changed from the initial post you made around page 2. This isn't 'just' a case of views on women where it's different on the ground, as there are some real diamonds that are credits to the workplace, etc. This puts women's debate alongside criminal or harmful stuff.

Perhaps deviant behaviour gatherings, abusive letters sources, grooming fora and so on also have large percentages of the sites where posts discuss eating disorders, adoption, fertility treatment, other family members, minors, debt, violence from partners, relatives or even near-adult children. Moreover, that the use of language and content on the harmless threads is seen as fair game to inform and track down the parts where the more depraved things are set down. How can the above (who are collateral of people's posts over many years and under many user policies to which users had to consent, and not with Aston but with the forum they thought they were consenting to - a long time before AI or scraping were ever in the frame) be the sandboxes, literally, of researchers? Should ethical academics, allegedly interested in the welfare of young people, have really dug deep on these points, if (as you see) even a bunch of internet randoms are capable of it?

I name-changed after my previous post, as I wanted to say more about various things at work, without linking it to Aston.

I share the anger & frustration, & as someone who has worked their arse off for Aston & its students, I'm gutted (but not susprised) to see womens legitimate conversations framed in this way.

I thought the VC would handle this differently. I dont think he gives a shit about women, but he cares very much about the university's reputation. My best guess would be that he thinks we're "only mums" so our words, & our feelings about how they're used are irrelevant/trivial.

I also thought AIFL would handle this differently. The issues with research integrity & ethics should have been absolutely clear, & I would have expected this to have presented a barrier to the student's progression.

Im sad to say it, but it's kind of on-brand for 2024 Aston. The lack of rigour & total "who gives a fuck" approach to women is about right.

I'm nervous of saying anything that could out me. I'm not afraid to stand up for what Aston should be (& used to be), but some of us are working on something & I don't want to draw too much attention to myself ahead of publishing that.

And to answer your final question, Ormally, yes - 100%. There's no excuse for academics not doing that. The issues are absolutely obvious. There's no excuse for that seemingly not happening.

Adding that that presentation went right ahead but we are not privy to the ‘analysis’ that found FWR transphobic. @JustineMumsnet did you ask / were given a copy of Eden’s presentation at the conference that blithely labelled us all transphobic?

Sorry to ask, but I seem to have lost the plot on this issue, and have failed to educate myself in following this 3rd thread.

Can someone who has the time and understanding do a summary.

I can remember as far back as MNHQ challenging the university, and some vague assurances given to them. But no over all, or wider impact achieved.

And I thought the student concerned had dropped or been dropped from discussing her work. But now it seems she went ahead? If so was in published, ie is it available for others outside of Aston?

In other words did Aston effectively okay what she was doing, and if so is MNHQ happy with that?

Aston said yes to deleting the OG data scrape from their onsite computers but no to halting the ridiculous PhD that has already concluded we are all transphobes before it’s even begun. They/them has amended the name out of the title so that instead of naming MN it’s now ‘A British Parenting Forum’.

MN are pursuing a legal case against Aston @IwantToRetire - which is why we don’t have many updates - it may turn out to be far bigger than some sadsack’s crap PhD as data scraping websites for large language models is a bit of a thorny issue all over the western world at the moment.

I can’t recall whether the student presented at conference or not, but they/them definitely seems to be avoiding doing anything with online tickets available!

MN are pursuing a legal case against Aston - which is why we don’t have many updates - it may turn out to be far bigger than some sadsack’s crap PhD as data scraping websites for large language models is a bit of a thorny issue all over the western world at the moment.

Many, many thanks.

I must have missed a chunk of posts.

Glad MNHQ (but sorry they need to) are pursuing this legally.

Fingers crossed for the outcome, and I hope a much wider discussion by others about how the unregulated virtual world, isn't always the nice escape from IRL consequences.