Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

A subforum or sticky thread for FWR?

42 replies

ArsenicSoup · 04/11/2014 18:21

Can we explore the options for a 'Shallow End' (working title) for FWR please?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/2226781-Why-can-practical-feminism-not-be-a-sub-board-Or-thread?msgid=50511811#50511811

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
IrenetheQuaint · 08/11/2014 12:58

Memo to self: always preview before posting from the train.

IrenetheQuaint · 08/11/2014 12:57

I must admit, having whinged upthread about the scariness of FWR Chat, that there are now loads of interesting yet accessible threads on there where I can post pointlessly wittily when I get it from the pub. Maybe it was just a particular phase, or maybe the main posters becoming aware of the issue was all that was needed.

Stiĺl think anything related to Judith Butler is best off in the theory section, though!

FrauHelgaMissMarpleandaChuckle · 08/11/2014 07:51

Good point Scone - "shallow" implies that those who post there haven't thought things through properly, and are "shallow" academically "not exhibiting, requiring, or capable of serious thought."

SconeRhymesWithGone · 08/11/2014 05:58

If you do it (and I don't think it's necessary) could it be called something that does not have "shallow" in the name?

Original poster
ArsenicSoup · 08/11/2014 02:05

I'm not surprised it sticks in the mind.

OP posts:
SkullytonFlowers · 07/11/2014 18:43

im not anybody, i just remember the furor really well, wasn't hard to find the threads in question... i found them a couple of weeks ago when someone jokingly mentioned the 'ghandi is a bastard' incident!

Original poster
ArsenicSoup · 07/11/2014 18:01

I do think a section would be better than a single thread.

OP posts:
BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 07/11/2014 09:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TunipTheUnconquerable · 07/11/2014 09:23

Arsenic, I do think you're right that a designated shallow end is a good idea, btw, in case I haven't made it clear.
No-one can seriously expect the whole feminist 'chat' section to serve that purpose.
Threads can be started with 'the shallow end' as a name, but a subforum would seem to be a more permanent option.

TunipTheUnconquerable · 07/11/2014 08:51

Ah, I've just realised who SkullytonFlowers is.
Right.

IrenetheQuaint · 06/11/2014 22:47

Yes, asking Buffy and the other FWR stalwarts to take the rap for the olden days of Dittany et al is rather like blaming David Cameron for the Highland Clearances.

BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 06/11/2014 22:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
ArsenicSoup · 06/11/2014 22:21

Maybe it is most constructive to just try to forget the antagonistic history (which some of us don't remember anyway) and troubleshoot the situation as it stands now (with one eye on the elephant traps that derailled previous attempts)?

OP posts:
BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 06/11/2014 22:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
ArsenicSoup · 06/11/2014 22:16

I really can't see the problem with a loose distinction between the more academic and less academic threads, with analysis of Judith Butler or language-based hierarchies going in the Feminist Theory section and arguing about whether it's better to give children their father's or mother's surname or whatever on the FWR chat board.

Sounds perfect.

OP posts:
IrenetheQuaint · 06/11/2014 22:05

YY Tunip, radfems are surely not capable of chatting or being lighthearted Shock

Really, there is a lot of nonsense talked about all of this, some of it by posters who clearly just don't like feminists or feminism.

As I said above, I really can't see the problem with a loose distinction between the more academic and less academic threads, with analysis of Judith Butler or language-based hierarchies going in the Feminist Theory section and arguing about whether it's better to give children their father's or mother's surname or whatever on the FWR chat board. There's bound to be some overlap and threads developing unexpectedly one way or another, but hey, such is life.

Original poster
ArsenicSoup · 06/11/2014 21:57

More reading Grin Thanks.

There must be a way of letting two types of conversation happen side by side.

OP posts:
SkullytonFlowers · 06/11/2014 20:57

evidently you did tunip, as at the time, there were nearly 5000 posts to do with it, in FWR and in Site Stuff.

And just like back then, right now you're doing exactly the same as they did then, making it clear that no-one else was permitted a space free from being accused of being a rape apologist.

Original poster
ArsenicSoup · 06/11/2014 20:21

That point also makes sense Tunip which might be why designating a sub-forum as something like 'the shallow end' OR 'practical feminism' OR 'issues based feminism' might make the differentiation?

OP posts:
Original poster
ArsenicSoup · 06/11/2014 20:06

Thanks Skully I am starting to appreciate just what a saga this all is.

I didn't realise how new some of the boards there were either.

The current state of affairs is ludicrous IMHO. There seem to be dozens of women who want to use FWR but don't feel able to. But two long 'Why do more women not post on FWR?' threads don't seem to have resolved anything.

Who knows what the answer is?

OP posts:
TunipTheUnconquerable · 06/11/2014 20:04

Ah I must have never got the memo that the radfems weren't allowed to chat and were supposed to confine ourselves to the activism and theory boards. Hmm

SkullytonFlowers · 06/11/2014 19:53

it was in 2012, it started with Dittany suggesting a name change for the single solitary FWR board.

It blew up from there, but the extra boards were created with Theory/activism supposedly being for the more hardline/RadFem posters, with FWR chat being left for everyone else just coming around to feminism and wanting to be able to chat without the yells of rape apologist, sex pozzie and other things that used to get thrown out there to shut down conversation.

Over the last two years, the mumsnet radfems have stopped using activism/theory and taken over Chat, so now, someone else is suggesting yet another 'femlite' forum for everyone else to use.

I didnt mean to be harsh at you.. its just that a new subboard wont change anything, they will once again, take over and push everyone out, because no-one is allowed to discuss feminism on mumsnet unless you proscribe to the accepted rad-fem view.

Original poster
ArsenicSoup · 06/11/2014 18:32

Hi ChristmasKate, well it's all very debated and debatable but for all the people who have been saying "I would like to post in FWR but....".

For more issue-led, theory-light discussion maybe (?) and for those not familiar with theoretical feminism (? again)

It might defuse the contentious discussion that seems to be ongoing.

OP posts:
BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 06/11/2014 18:01

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.