Any chance of a review of the FWR moderation rules in light of Maya Forstater's success in court please?

having a man moderating the speech of feminists is a strange choice. The things we say WILL make him uncomfortable.

Hmm could you say this about having a White person moderating the speech of Black people on BMN being a strange choice? Not saying a man should but I can't help but compare statements like this with others.

I do think that combining the boards under Feminism could be good, rather than having separate boards for Feminism chat/activism/theory/support etc.

Let this thread run for a while longer, then take the many suggestions that have been made, and do this, suggested by Vanishun:

Could you do a user survey where people have to be logged in to do it, and then poll user feelings about the topics? Possibly dividing into new vs older members too?

@JustineMumsnet
The women who post on mumsnet in general, and in particular on FWR are some of the most thoughtful, articulate, balanced and well-informed posters I have ever come across on any forum. I'm sure you realise that.
Take your time, and listen to the women who use your forum!

"Threads devoted to named individuals to unpick their gender presentation, appearance, lifestyle or personal choices constitute a personal attack, so we will continue to delete them along with unfair generalisations"
Has there been a lot of this happening? I read this board a lot, and haven't seen any threads that would come under this description, though I appreciate I may have missed them.

having a man moderating the speech of feminists is a strange choice. The things we say WILL make him uncomfortable.

Indeed. As is natural. Feminism is a movement for women and girls. It deals with women's lives and experiences in a world which centres males.

But now we have a court judgement. What, Justine, if the other side becomes as aggressive as the TRAs? Does the development of ever increasingly placatory policies and moderating attitudes and actions in favour of genderism now constitute illegal discrimination against GC women? What if some women start saying they do and invoking lawyers and advertisers in the light of this judgement?

All we're saying is that this is an important and far-reaching judgement as Maya's solicitor Paul Daly has pointed out.

Are you sure you're on the right side of it now that you are more censorious than Twitter? And will you reconsider these policies?

This. Please consider the implications of discrimination against people's protected beliefs.

However you shuffle boards and subjects around, this question remains:

Will there be a board where women with the protected characteristic of Gender Critical philosophical beliefs can freely, in words that do not obfuscate or tie the poster in knots, talk about all issues facing women and girls?

And what’s the point in ring fencing types of feminism so you only get answers that agree with you

It's the very definition of an echo chamber. Something that we are always accused of being in!

And what’s the point in ring fencing types of feminism so you only get answers that agree with you

I confess I've not read the whole thread so I'm not sure how we've gone from the original op to discussing a separate board. But I agree with this point:
Just thinking more about the Black Mumsnetters board. I don't think the women who campaigned for that wanted other posters to relinquish an existing board did they?
They wanted somewhere to discuss issues that affect them uniquely and that they have a special interest in, so that's what they campaigned for.
Could the people who don't want to post on FWR for what ever reason do that?

To repeat what I posted in FWR, if there are people who want an additional, separate board then I think it's up to them to argue the case for one, think up a new name for it etc. I don't see why an established, well used board should be the one to move.

Adding my voice to say the proposal is unworkable and that it's not the core FWR users who have any problem scrolling past topics they aren't interested in.

If the idea is to create new sections or boards, I think it would be more relevant to have a board for trans issues that relate to trans healthcare and trans rights because often threads are posted in FWR that don't seem to have a direct link to feminism. Why isn't that offered as a resource for interested parties to discuss issues that matter to them?

And we do have threads debating the differences between liberal feminism and 2nd wave, women's lib etc, so yes, won't work.

I did ask for clarification Datun, and it was suggested by my anonymous correspondent that I use the word 'transwoman'.

I said I wasn't comfortable with that and got the following reply

We're asking for civil debate in what can be heated and controversial discussions.

so none the wiser really. I considered starting a thread here to ask if the use of 'transwoman' is now mandated but just couldn't be arsed

the rules will be different tomorrow innit?

(ps am I the only one who finds receiving anonymous emails to be titanically uncivil ? Ironic, no?)

What were you supposed to say, was there a suggestion?

I can understand how criticising an individual for, say, their appearance is uncivil. But being able to collectively referred to a cohort who are male, because it's them being male that's the problem?

@JustineMumsnet @soniamumsnet

can you estimate what the impact on site traffic will be? for example the cognitive dissonance? the usability issues of users forgetting that there are different sections? what will the experience be like on mobile? Moderation challenges where a single post belongs in a different section? Moderation when disruptors post deliberately to move it to a different section? what drop in traffic have you seen on FWR related petitions now that you've moved all petitions to a separate board?

could you post a screenshot of the user experience you are thinking of?

I can't see how you can possibly separate out sex, gender and feminism. I cannot think of a topic that isn't impacted by the issues of the definition of woman. To have to discuss a topic like how to encourage girls in sport without mentioning the trans issue would be stifling. Women would be biting their tongues and end up just starting the same conversation on the other board without the restrictions. No one actually wants this. After after a little flurry of interest the people who complain about trans issues taking over will melt away and there won't be enough people to justify the conversation. Please don't do this. If you must then create a separate board for them not for the regular users. What we discuss is feminism and all the issues that impact women and girls we don't discuss 'trans rights' except where they impact feminism.

And especially as the modding rules are different from other Mumsnet boards.

In light of Maya's success in court, and that 'gender critical' beliefs are considered protected under the Equality Act, would it be possible for the FWR sex/gender mod rules to be re-visited.

Especially as the current rules do make it a hostile environment for women wanting to discuss their sex based rights and could be considered discrimination following that judgement

People don't really think trans issues swamp FWR. They think that GC views are transphobic and should not be allowed at all.

I'm fairly certain that most, if not all, GC posters are not the ones complaining about the discussion of the impact of the TRA ideology on women.

I'd like 'Feminism Chat' to go back to being FWR 'Feminism and Women's Rights'.

Women's rights (Rather than necessarily 'feminism' )are at the core of these discussions. If a new board is created then at least recognise that - 'Sex, gender and Women's Rights' might possibly work. (And it would become commonly known as FWR).