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

You can’t separate off the topics, because the user base doesn’t divide neatly like that.

I would also like to see some concrete examples.

Because what I imagine happening is this:

Topic: woeful funding of rape crisis centres. Definitely feminist. But what if they lost their funding for not offering gender neutral services? Move to new section or not?

Topic: maternal mortality in Black women. Definitely feminist. But what if the literature refers to them as “black birthing bodies?” (Yes, sadly,this has happeneded). Move or not?

Topic: deficiencies in funding for research into female specific diseases. Definitely feminist. But the Endometriosis Society now says that “10% of people have endometriosis”. Move or not?

Topic: MVAWG. Definitely feminist. But how do you talk about it without defining who is M and who are W & G? Move or not?

Please do take this in the spirit that it’s meant, which is that I’m trying to understand both what’s intended and how it would work.

For the record, I've never requested for the feminism board to change or be moved or divided. It doesn't really bother me the way it is but I can see how it would be useful to not have to wade through so many trans-related threads to get to other feminism issues.

I also agree with pp that it could be divided based on libfem, gc fem, etc feminism. Some of us don't have a label so could go from one to the other and join in any thread.

@JustineMumsnet
First of all, a heartfelt thank you for continuing to host these discussions when it would have no doubt been so much easier not to. I have no doubt that yesterday's result was due in no small part to women being able to discuss their concerns on these boards.

I agree with reducing the number of boards under FWR but I'm not sure that what you are suggesting is the best way to go. It seems to me that it would just result in GC and Lib Fem silos.

Perhaps just remove the unused boards and see how things go now we have had clarity from yesterday's verdict that, as you rightly say, has vindicated MN's approach?

Eg in Feminism: "these mothers were all victims of stalking, what can we do about it? "
Goader: mothers? You're grouping them according to their sex? Can this be moved to the Sex and Gender forum please mods?

@CardinalLolzy I doubt MNHQ would move post based on that, especially with the court ruling terms based on biological facts shouldn't be policed so much now. It's clearly trolling. I think it's more about separating anything where the main issue is to do with the trans debate/trans issue against women's sex-based rights than not being able to mention sex or sex-based rights anywhere else. It's what I'm getting from Justine's posts anyway so could be wrong.

I must say that having comments deleted for pointing out that a group of people are male when the whole blooming problem is that they are male does make talking about the problem quite tricky.

I'd go so far as to say that not to be able to clearly state what your actual argument is creates a hostile environment

That's a good idea Embarrassing, it would help to see how this would look in real life

Is it possible to give some examples of discussions (maybe from the current 4 pages) and where they might belong? Just so that we have a fuller sense of the proposal?

Well the aim here is to facilitate the many requests we've had for a reorganisation from those who are keen to discuss, for example, inequality and stereotyping but want to avoid discussions around the trans vs women's rights debate. So yes we'd ask you to post accordingly

but you know as well as we do that MN is monitored by people who dont post here but sit on threads looking for things to report. They dont even need to be a member. Its just a new tactic of the same old old same old 'stop talking about this'

Given the recent shift in reporting around this issue in the mainstream media it seems incredibly convenient that just as the wider public is waking up to this and saying no, court cases are going the GC way and organisations are questioning the Stonewall apporcoh, that MN are now getting a load of requests to have a separate topic area downthecorridorroundthecorner8thdoorontheleft

I prefer a topic being created for liberal feminism, and perhaps intersectional feminism (there'd be an argument about that that really is however.)

You'd still end up with discussions on sex and gender.

i'd be sorry to lose some of voices who do come and test the arguments and share ideas, but if people who identify as intersectional feminists find FWR isn't a comfortable place for them for some reason, them having a dedicated space seems OK.

In the same way as I respect the Black Mumsnetter's board I would respect their space

Well the aim here is to facilitate the many requests we've had for a reorganisation from those who are keen to discuss, for example, inequality and stereotyping but want to avoid discussions around the trans vs women's rights debate. So yes we'd ask you to post accordingly.

So @JustineMumsnet, and thank you for continuing the discussion, does that mean if the majority of posters wanted to maintain the single board without hiving off the topics, that you would listen to the majority?

You must know that many other topics are discussed at length on the board. It is simply not true that it is one topic board despite the biased views that it is. Those are usually the exact same posters that accuse other women of transphobia.

You do already have other boards under the Feminism topic, are they well utilised? Do you believe those that wish to hive off these discussions are not able to post on those other boards themselves?

However you divide it, its going to cause problems. That's why user research will help. Make it something that's wanted by regulars.

Also, thinking about the coronavirus board, I've disagreed with people there.

The point of mumsnet's FWR and why its been respected by feminists, was being host to debate and people disagreeing, more debating and agree to disagree. Respectfully.

This thread is just querying the mod decisions.

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

I agree with this but such threads happen incredibly rarely (less than one a month i reckon?) and I don't think anyone was really talking about this in particular?

(Was posting after Marsha!)

Here’s an idea. What if you flipped it, and had a section for trans issues, including “intersectional feminism”?

Great idea. Why not?

Exactly what I was about to post.

You start the threads you want to read. Scroll past the others.

Half of CV is useless and uninteresting to me now, bar the odd data thread.

Hear bloody hear!

Here’s an idea. What if you flipped it, and had a section for trans issues, including “intersectional feminism”? In addition to the LGBT parenting board.

People there can discuss those topics relating to trans that don’t take a gender critical feminist perspective.

I for one, as a confirmed gender atheist, would be happy to promise not to post anything about my version of feminism there. My concern genuinely is women’s rights, and if people did want to have a section where they discussed trans and feminist issues where opinions like mine wouldn’t be encouraged, I wouldn’t oppose that.

I think that could equally serve the needs of people who find feminist chat overwhelming.

Worth considering?

It's really not about the haters - it's about the regular users who have a different take to GC feminists but still consider themselves feminists.

but why can't they just ignore the threads they don't like and start ones they do? why must they be shielded from seeing people with different opinions to them?

seems fragile, no?