Poll: which boards would you like to see in the Feminism topic?

[HillaryFTW]

Currently there are five boards: Chat, Activism, Book Club, Theory and Support. Chat is far and away the most populated.

MNHQ have said on Site Stuff that they are rationalising the boards in the near future. So I thought it was worth asking which boards posters here would like.

I would like to keep chat and activism and rename book club as "feminist books" or "feminist reading".

Chat, Activism, Theory and Book Club.

Chat has become the place people come to for support.
Activism bit has a few important long running threads that would just get lost in chat.
We probably should use theory more to stop people getting all sniffy about being too high brow, whatever the fuck that means.
Book club also has useful info that would also get lost in chat.

Just feminism. Maybe with a sticky explaining that if you can say "i believe women should be equal to men" without adding a but then you're good to post.

I agree with Thatstoast Other than the topics in Books which are about books there is no obvious difference between the contents of the other threads and Chat.

I can't see anything in the first page of Theory which would not fit in , and indeed has not been the subject of, threads in Chat.

The existing threads could be archived rather than deleted.

Book Club should stay. I would also like it to be a forum for books feminists can read without allergic reaction, not just explicitly feminist books. After all, feminists want to read literatute, sometimes, too.

Good idea Vestal. Reading for feminists might be a good title.

Chat and Reading for Feminists. The current topics in activism and theory are all topics that would and have been discussed in chat, except that, for the most part, they have few posts. I am especially concerned that people new to MN post something in Feminist Support and then get no response. A lot of support happens in chat.

Fewer topics the better.

I'd go for just chat.

But remembering the history if the FWR wars, I think it might be better to leave them exactly as they are.

Really, meditrina?

That was so long ago and it's worse to have unused boardS, I think. IIRC, the split of boards was set at inception of the topic and it hasn't been looked at since. I don't think the board names were massively bought into even then!

My memory is pretty bad but I thought they only got split off in their current form last year?

Chat, activism, something that combines theory & reading?

Support could be in chat or activism (I think it would naturally evolve that way)

Fem reading kind of links into theory - hard to read The Handmaid's Tale without starting down the road of theory. Not sure what you'd call it, though.

That sounds like a good plan, KickAss.

How about making it explicitly 'Chat and Support', Activism and 'Books and Theory' ?

What Errol says.

I think it might be useful to decide if you want a female-only space or not and, if so, make this clear at the outset.
As someone who often lurks on these threads, it does seem that every time a man offers a viewpoint the whole tone of the thread descends into a point-scoring exercise against the "troll", rather than an open and balanced discussion. The thread can often feel quite cliquey, with the parameters for discussion set by a group of regular posters. This can be quite off-putting for new posters seeking to engage.
I really don't mean to offend anyone by these comments and very much hope I am not suspected of being a man or a "troll" because I most certainly am neither of these!
I think there would be a definite need for a feminist theory board that could be more of an "echo chamber" for feminist academics.
However, as far as "Chat" goes, I do feel that everyone has to bear in mind that this is the internet. It is an open forum and nobody has ownership of this space, regardless of their knowledge in this area, personal circumstances or sex. Feminist issues impact everyone and all views, even dissent, should be respected.
The nature of the internet is such that it is open to trolling and all sorts of tactics and nobody can control this - only how we respond.

The nature of the internet is such that it is open to trolling and all sorts of tactics and nobody can control this - only how we respond.

yy to that.

there's no practical way to make an area female only. The problems with male posters (troll or otherwise) is that there's a very well researched argument that as men have never experienced life as a woman they have little useful input into a discussion about women's lives. Also, that we live in a world where we hear the male pov all the time (in every movie, TV show, news report etc) so women want/need a space where they don't get that. Even if they're wrong they want to be wrong in their own space.

I think those arguments are ones which fit better in a theory section, rather than a general chat section. General chat should be open to everyone, even if they're only just starting to think about certain ideas for the first time, whereas theory has hundreds of years of academic research behind it, and some ideas which are commonly held, so it does derail the thread if someone misunderstands or starts questioning some of the ideas, even if coming from a very genuine poster.

Part of the problem is that some people see 'theory' as meaning just thinking about things, and others see it as the defined field of academic research. It can mean coming to a discussion with a very different set of expectations.

As someone who often lurks on these threads, it does seem that every time a man offers a viewpoint the whole tone of the thread descends into a point-scoring exercise against the "troll", rather than an open and balanced discussion.

Certainly not every time. There are men who post respectfully and in the spirit of supporting feminism. I like to hear what they have to say. There are ways of dealing with trolls without excluding men from the forum. Besides, as KickAss said, it's not really practical on an internet forum, and also I doubt that MNHQ would be in favor.

I was, for example, wondering if people posting on chat fora about environmentalism are required to adjust their discourse so it is 'balanced' by people in favour of fracking

Why should consideration of fracking not be considered?

Satisfying energy needs is more complex than renewable good -everything else bad.
I have a vested interest in renewable energy but I could argue a case that wind farms are expensive, inefficient, a blot on the landscape, damage wildlife and on the whole produce enormous subsidised revenues for wealthy private landowners and that fracking will bring jobs and investment to areas where both are sorely needed. Some people are of the view that nuclear is an environmentally clean source- that is not a view shared by the wind sector but in a wider context why should supporters of fracking not have their say?

I'd like to see it go back to one board, tbh. The split only happened as a pretend solution to the " I'd post if dittany fucked off FWR isn't very nice to me when I'm disagreeing with everything that's posted on there" problem.

Maybe with an addition of an FWR classics type board where threads that are particularly interesting or cover the regular themes with great content can go.

Thanks everyone. As I say, I really don't wish to offend anyone here as I've learned a lot from these threads.

There was a thread about "benevolent sexism" the other day in which somebody posted a link to a quiz designed to assess your tolerance / acceptance levels to this kind of sexism. I did this quiz and was/am apparently more tolerant than average to benevolent sexism, but what got me thinking was a comment at the end of the quiz that often women "cling" to benevolent sexism behaviours (or even convince themselves that they enjoy them) because the alternative "unpleasant sexism" is so much worse. This struck a chord with me, given the behaviour of my husband, the way I've tended to respond to him and the way my sons are being brought up.

The OP had basically asked why her husband was in a bit of strop because she had rejected his ideas about chivalrous behaviour towards women. There was a man on the thread who, to me, seemed like a fairly typical man trying to give an honest view (despite making one sexist joke that was inappropriate). To my mind, it seemed like there were provocative statements flying both ways. It was an entertaining thread, but a shame that the OP's question couldn't have been explored in a slightly more productive and tolerant context! There were some interesting points made nonetheless, but then the thread disappeared - possibly because of its general tone, I don't know?